Why the heck not?

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

You know I am really proud to have actually put forth an idea that wasn't considered heresy.

 

Hawksmoor

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

I've been using this for some time as well and it works just fine. All normal OCV/DCV modifiers apply, but the base OCV is the character's ECV. To balance it as a +0 Advantage and capture the "mental" aspect, I state that the attack becomes visible to Mental Senses and is a Mental Power as well as whatever other aspects. That way if a character has adjustment powers that affect all mental powers, this power would be affected as well. If a character could affect all fire powers and this was a firestarter type power it could still be affected because it is still a fire base power. Also, if the character cannot see the target he cannot attack him.

 

So:

 

Targeted by EOCV +0, Powers visible to Mental Senses, Powers affected as Mental Powers.

 

I don't see anything wrong with that. It's an easy way to represent a mentalists control of the physical world.

 

This isn't the same as Based on ECV which makes the power a mental power, gives it LOS, and all the other trappings of mental powers (defended with ECV, etc.).

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Just did a check on BoECV in 5ER which is a +1 advantage. However, since normal range, desolid apply normally, that makes it a +1/2. -1/4 further would allow the target to choose mental or physical defenses to apply so this effectively covers the power's standard defense applies issue. Now we are at +1/4. The fact that the power is defended by DCV and cover effectively wipes out that +1/4, or alternatively/additionally restores the power's ability to do damage as normal (i.e. not STUN only).

 

So, at a maximum it is +1/4 advantage but I think +0 is more appropriate, especially if you factor in the Mental Sense/Affected as Mental Power aspects I noted above.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

I've been using this for some time as well and it works just fine. All normal OCV/DCV modifiers apply, but the base OCV is the character's ECV. To balance it as a +0 Advantage and capture the "mental" aspect, I state that the attack becomes visible to Mental Senses and is a Mental Power as well as whatever other aspects. That way if a character has adjustment powers that affect all mental powers, this power would be affected as well. If a character could affect all fire powers and this was a firestarter type power it could still be affected because it is still a fire base power. Also, if the character cannot see the target he cannot attack him.

 

So:

 

Targeted by EOCV +0, Powers visible to Mental Senses, Powers affected as Mental Powers.

 

I don't see anything wrong with that. It's an easy way to represent a mentalists control of the physical world.

 

 

totally agree. best summation I've seen on this. I would definitely add in the "can be sensed by mental senses/perception" as well. +0 is perfect.

[Agent X]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Just did a check on BoECV in 5ER which is a +1 advantage. However, since normal range, desolid apply normally, that makes it a +1/2. -1/4 further would allow the target to choose mental or physical defenses to apply so this effectively covers the power's standard defense applies issue. Now we are at +1/4. The fact that the power is defended by DCV and cover effectively wipes out that +1/4, or alternatively/additionally restores the power's ability to do damage as normal (i.e. not STUN only).

 

So, at a maximum it is +1/4 advantage but I think +0 is more appropriate, especially if you factor in the Mental Sense/Affected as Mental Power aspects I noted above.

Excellent posts! Rep for you

[Sean Waters]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Give me a solid point-based reason why this is unbalancing.

 

Simply, you can't, because it's not.

 

.........

 

Seriously, feel free to use ECV as OCV if it's appropriate. The Munchkin King has given his blessing.

 

HERESY!!!

 

(for Hawksmoor)

 

 

 

 

Well, Munchkin King, I think Joe Bob Mentalist is fine so long as his Dex always exceeds his Ego.

 

Now we slightly rebuild your example, swapping the Ego and Dex values and using the spare points to level up our speed. In practice, for a character with mental powers, a far more likely build. Same points, though.

 

Now we begin to see why it is unbalancing. You mention the 4 point advantage. Something for nothing is BAD. Of course if he has 2 or 3 attacks he targets with Ego instead of Dex it becomes a six point advantage, and if there was a difference of eight points between Dex and Ego that would be a nine point advantage, and if the attacks were not really linked by a common special effect, that would be a fifteen point advantage...

 

If you want to do this, and you are saying it makes no difference in practice, I'd let you take it as a +0 advantage while the ECV is lower than OCV anyway, but as soon as it becomes higher, you'll be taking a +1/4. If you are not happy with the +1/4, then buy +1 OCV levels with your attack/s so that your OCV equals your ECV with that attack and claim you are attacking with your ECV, if that makes you feel all snuggly. No one will know different and it really won't make any difference. Bing bong-a-boom, no free points.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

But if you make it +1/4 then I would request - nay - DEMAND that it be targeted against DECV since that's how BoECV would work. If you are going to make me pay for an advantage, I'll want all the advantage I can get.

 

That's why I think it should be a +0 advantage. It isn't worth +1/4. +1/4 is Autofire 3 or Variable Special Effect... this is not that useful.

 

The mentalist that doesn't buy up his DEX is going to have enough issues with low DEX that the sub-+1/4 value of Targeted with ECV is really color more than anything.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Well, Munchkin King, I think Joe Bob Mentalist is fine so long as his Dex always exceeds his Ego.

 

Now we slightly rebuild your example, swapping the Ego and Dex values and using the spare points to level up our speed. In practice, for a character with mental powers, a far more likely build. Same points, though.

 

Let's rack this up against Bobbie Sue Energy Projector. She has 10 Ego and 23 DEX. All of her attack powers target using OCV based on DEX, for free, because that's the default. She decides she would like a Hypnotizing Lights attack. It's Mind Control. "But wait" thinks Bobbie Sue "I only have a 3 ECV."

 

So she buys her Mind Control "Based on CON for a -1 1/2 (IIRC) limitaton. However, she doesn't want PD or ED to stop her Mind COntrol - so she makes it AVLD for +1 1/2 (+3/4 if you accept Mental Defense was the original default) and makes it vs Mental Defense (or maybe Flash Defense). Net cost - the same 5 points per die she would have paid for the original, unmodified Mind Control (which would have hit much less frequently).

 

It's imprecise. If I allowed a +0 to use OCV instead of OECV, the charactrer would still target DECV, which is likely advantageous as most characters have beeter physical DCV than mental (and can only dodge, etc. physically). But the mentalist who switches to target with Ego rather than DEX loses by targetting physical DCV.

 

DEX is, in my opinion, no more valuable as a characteristic than Ego. We've already established both cost 2 net CP per stat point.

 

Assume that we can swap OCV basis for free, to remove that difference. We can't change DCV, and characters are far more often targeted physically than mentally. Ego may give me an advantage against PRE attacks (depends whether PRE is higher), and mental attacks. What's more valuable? More characters, IME, buy additions to DCV than buy PRE defense or mental defense (especially mental defense with no impact on Ego attacks).

 

What is unfair is that Mentalists end up having to pay for two combat statistics (as most do have at least one physical attack, commonly TK based). Bobbie Sue can get away with 10 Ego - she's still effective, albeit vulnerable to mental attacks. But Joe Bob has to buy both Ego and DEX to get a decent OCV with his powers, investing points in two stats instead of one.

 

This also leads to out of concept purchases. Are all mentalists quick and agile? Probably not but unless they want no OCV with TK, they have to be. That's a point advantage to the character without mental attacks, which seems to be overlooked in your analysis.

 

Allowing a swap of DEX OCV for Ego OCV for free, where the concept warrants it, levels the playing field. Our Dex-slow egoist will be an easy target for physical attacks, so it's not like foregoing DEX because it doesn't hamper his OCV comes with no drawbacks. As well, DEX based rolls are still a lot more common than Ego based rolls.

 

This leads me to agree with a +0 advantage for "Ego Based OCV". Not a big advantage. Not a big drawback. Just different plusses and minuses.

 

Hmmm...for a more heretical option, we could drop the cost of DEX and Ego by 1 point each, and create a separate "OCV" stat. OCV is for m,ental and physical attacks. It costs 6 points for +1 OCV. You can put a -1 "only physically targeted attacks" or a -1 "only mentally targeted attacks" limitation on it. You get to define which CV your powers act with.

 

All your powers are physical and you have 25 DEX? Pay 30 for DEX and 15 for +5 Physical OCV. All your powers are mental and you have a 25 EGO? Pay 15 for EGO and 15 for +5 Mental OCV. And lkook - we get rid of the 3 point rounding issue for DEX and EGO (well, not really since we still have DCV, but it's reduced).

[tesuji]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

FWIW, i think that the value of "this attack uses trait A instead of trait B for my attack CV but keeps the normal DV trait for the enemy" will be an advantage or limitation for a CHARACTER based on that characters's traits.

 

The relative cost of DEX and EGO is not the determining factor, what it does to the character's abilities is.

 

if ego is significantly higher than dex, the switching from dex OCv to ego OCV for an attack is an advantage. It ought to be worth AT LEAST 2 cp, the cost of a single +1 OCV for one attack combat level.

 

If ego is lower than dex, the reverse might be true.

 

Frankly though, its entirely likely the most "accurate" way of handling this, if one assumes that CSLs are accurately priced (a very debateable concept*) is to simply buy CSLs or take NSLs to adjust the values. The EFFECT is "+2 to hit with this attack" and the SFX is "because it is targetted mentally instead of physically". Pay for the EFFECT, cost based on result.

 

Consider the following simple character...

 

Str 13

Dex 20

Con 23

Body 13

Int 23

Ego 30

pre 18

Com 18

pd 5

ed 5

spd 5

end 50

rec 8

stun 32

 

Multipower mental powers 100 pts

6 12d6 mind control

6 12d6 telepathy

c 6d6 mental attack

6 40 str tk

4 20/20 force field tk fx

6 12d6 Eb tk punch

4 20" fly tk fx

 

mental defense +10

 

Now that character as written has +10 ECv for his mental attacks and +7 OCv for his tk punch and tk.

 

if you keep everything the same except:

 

Multipower mental powers 100 pts

6 12d6 mind control

6 12d6 telepathy

c 6d6 mental attack

6 40 str tk (uses ECv for attack roll vs DCV)

4 20/20 force field tk fx

6 12d6 Eb tk punch (uses ECv for attack roll vs DCV)

4 20" fly tk fx

 

now this character has everything the other guy did plus his EB and tk are at +10 ECv vs DCV. Thats a gain of +3 to-hit for two separate attacks.

 

thats not worth a +0 advantage on those two slots. Thats worth most likely +9 cp, give or take, +3 OCV-only CSLs applied to two attack powers.

 

or, i should say, thats true unless there are campaign effects that make ego-cv attacls less effective, like maybe a plethora of ego-drains way outnumbering dex drains.

 

* this is arguable because the very strong argument could be made that bonuses to-hit should be scaled with attack power level, be an advantage not an adder, as +3 with a 10d6 attack is a lot better than +3 with a 3d6 attack. But, right now, the system says "nope, they are the same."

[Agent X]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Hugh Nielson said it the long way so I get to say it the short way. Nobody is getting anything for free by using ECV to target DCV with a physical or energy attack AND doing so isn't imbalancing. The character had to buy ego after all AND ECV isn't usually that much higher than OCV if it is higher.

 

P.S. And Mudpyr8 confirmed my suspicions that the costing balances out if you add the advantages AND the limitations involved in using ECV to target with an energy blast.

 

P.P.S. No real response to this other than to distract from that analysis by bringing up the cost of Dexterity and making assertions that someone is getting something for free if they get to use ECV to target with which I find strange because they have the ECV they paid points for.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Right.

 

Don't like +1/4? Fine: I made the suggestion of getting the same result by buying OCV levels and calling it EOCV. What is wrong with that - no possibility of 'free points'? I also said that if Ego is lower than or equal to Dex, I'd have no problem with you targeting with Ego, again, no free points, what is wrong with that?

 

My concern is that if you just say 'hey, you can target based on Ego or Dex, your choice' it is going to be an immense advantage to the mentalist who has a huge array of mental powers, and wants a sneaky EB or RKA targeted with his immense Ego that he can use to take out enemy mentalists whose defences defeat his usual powers. Frankly he doesn't need to worry about most physical or energy attacks as he has an always on megascale AE mental illusion making him appear to be one hex to the left. Low DEX? Don't care; it's all the monkeys with high Ego that scare the pants off him.

 

Also, it also means that you are devaluing Dex if you allow people to decide which they will target with; in practice it will be the higher value. You will make Ego more useful, but pay no more for it.

 

Also if targeting with Ego is such a 'no cost idea', why is psychokinesis so expensive? (OK, maybe it is too expensive, but you see the point...)

 

Finally that isn't how it works: what if someone, seeing you hit often with your EB drains your DEX, not knowing that you CAN base it your attack on EOCV? They have wasted that attack in effect. If you want some sort of unexpected power or advantage like that, pony up.

 

Hugh, I think based on Con is a –1 not –1½, and mudpyr8, I’ll check those figures, but I thought you could BOECV vs physical or energy for +½ not +¼ , hence the +¼ suggestion.

[Max Faraday]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

FWIW, i think that the value of "this attack uses trait A instead of trait B for my attack CV but keeps the normal DV trait for the enemy" will be an advantage or limitation for a CHARACTER based on that characters's traits.

 

The relative cost of DEX and EGO is not the determining factor, what it does to the character's abilities is.

 

I agree with this 100%. If my character has a 23 EGO and a 15 DEX, there is no doubt that he gets added value out of using OECV rather than OCV to target his attacks. The rules say that EBs are targeted with OCV by default. If by changing that default my character gets an advantage (which is the case), I should have to pay something for it.

[Agent X]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

I agree with this 100%. If my character has a 23 EGO and a 15 DEX' date=' there is no doubt that he gets added value out of using OECV rather than OCV to target his attacks. The rules say that EBs are targeted with OCV by default. If by changing that default my character gets an advantage (which is the case), I should have to pay something for it.[/quote'] You did. You paid 26 points to have a 23 EGO.

[incrdbil]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

You did. You paid 26 points to have a 23 EGO.

...and he gets the benefits of a high ego roll, high ECV. Being able to take attacks based on OCV and switch them to his ECV is to that characters advantage if his EGO > his DEX. When he bought EGO, he was not paying for extra CV for non mental based powers.

 

Now, what about reaction times? If we're going to allow the normal attack to be based off ECV, shall he get to act at his EGO on initiative rather than DEX?

[RDU Neil]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

You did. You paid 26 points to have a 23 EGO.

 

 

In an off hand way, this simple statement sums up the entire argument here.

 

1) You believe that allowing Ego to target regular attacks is not worth changing the cost of Ego.

 

2) You believe that any additional advantage, specifically allowing it to target non-mental attacks, should increase the cost of Ego.

 

There really is no right answer. It's not like Advantages and Limitations have mathematic purity in determining what they are worth. Everything is relative. There is no universal mathematical calculation that says OAF is worth -1... it is -1, because relative to OIF(-1/2), IAF (-'1/2) and IIF (-1/4) that's about what it is worth.

 

Group 1 (as seemingly exemplified by AgentX) above believes the relative worth of Ego targetting to be +0. The 26 points paid for a 23 Ego is enough of a cost for him. Group 2 believes it to be +1/4, because 26 points isn't enough for them. Neither are right or wrong, no matter how much math you try to throw behind it. It's just what FEELS right, in the end. (Especially at that last break point of +1/4, where the granularity tends to stop.)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Group 1 (as seemingly exemplified by AgentX) above believes the relative worth of Ego targetting to be +0. The 26 points paid for a 23 Ego is enough of a cost for him. Group 2 believes it to be +1/4' date=' because 26 points isn't enough for them. Neither are right or wrong, no matter how much math you try to throw behind it. It's just what FEELS right, in the end. (Especially at that last break point of +1/4, where the granularity tends to stop.)[/quote']

 

Actually, this opens up a third possibility. Since DEX determines OCV, and Ego determines EOCV, perhaps any advantage to be paid should be on the cost of the stats, rather than a power or a skill level.

 

So "Ego also determines Physical OCV" might be worth +1/4, but DEX "also determines OCV for mental attack" would also cost +1/4.

 

These would then possibly need to be "unbundled" from "Based on ECV" (which would need to be renamed - maybe "Mental Attack", although that still implies "based on ECV") and "Mental Attack Based on CON" (maybe that becomes "Not Mental Attack").

 

The bottom line is that, if there should be an advantage to change the default of a physical attack from OCV to OECV, solely because it is changing the default, then there should logically also be an advantage (and not a limitation) for changing the default targeting of a mental attack.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

To take a stupid, but entirely appropriate example, why not allow BODY to be the characteristic governing targeting? It costs the same as Ego and (Dex - Spd), and is rarely higher than either?

 

Well, if you believe it makes no difference, go for it.

 

...however, that isn't the way it is done in the system you've chosen to play. Ego doesn't target non-mental attacks, why is that hard to understand? Allowing it to do so makes it more useful. Applying an advantage is silly because there is a far easier way to do it:

 

You want to say that your 15 Dex 23 Ego character targets his EB with Ego, get yourself 3x2point OCV levels with EB. Much cheaper than the 11 points you'd need to pay for even a +1/4 advantage, and appropriately more expensive than giving it for free.

 

You are never (except maybe to prove me wrong) going to be asking to target with Ego for a character with low Ego and high Dex. Be honest. Are you?

[Constantine]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

To take a stupid' date=' but entirely appropriate example, why not allow BODY to be the characteristic governing targeting? It costs the same as Ego and (Dex - Spd), and is rarely higher than either?[/quote']

 

It is a bad example, because it makes no sense. Allowing ego to target a "mental blast" can. Okay, so Dex and Ego are the same cost, but lets consider how useful Dex is. A lot more skills are based on dex then on ego, dex determines how often you are hit about 75% of the time, even if your character is a mentalist, dex determines who acts first in each phase, etc. Even though they maybe the same cost, dex is a lot more useful than ego. I wouldn't have a problem with someone determining that ego targets an eb. But once you define it that way, no take backs. If someone drains your ego, you can't switch back to dex for targeting. Didn't someone quote the rules saying that eb "defaults" to dex for targeting? Doesn't that mean that other options can be considered?

 

Besides, what is all the moaning about points, we all know we can munchkin-build obscene power/characters for a lot less points than your average pc. Just because two things are equal in points doesn't mean they are equally effective.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

It is a bad example, because it makes no sense. Allowing ego to target a "mental blast" can. Okay, so Dex and Ego are the same cost, but lets consider how useful Dex is. A lot more skills are based on dex then on ego, dex determines how often you are hit about 75% of the time, even if your character is a mentalist, dex determines who acts first in each phase, etc. Even though they maybe the same cost, dex is a lot more useful than ego. I wouldn't have a problem with someone determining that ego targets an eb. But once you define it that way, no take backs. If someone drains your ego, you can't switch back to dex for targeting. Didn't someone quote the rules saying that eb "defaults" to dex for targeting? Doesn't that mean that other options can be considered?

 

Besides, what is all the moaning about points, we all know we can munchkin-build obscene power/characters for a lot less points than your average pc. Just because two things are equal in points doesn't mean they are equally effective.

 

 

That it was a stupid example I acknowledge (and did in the post!), but people have been arguing points. Why not target with INT? That governs PER and would seem entirely appropriate if you want 'logic', but then you have the cost problem....

 

I don't think the 'default' comment was quoting any rules...

 

I'd agree with you that DEX is generally more useful, but wwhen you NEED Ego, it is more useful: Ego based attacks tend to have rigidly defined levels of effect: you are either Ego +10 or Ego +20, no grey, whereas Dex based attacks tend to have a smoother progression. One or two points of Ego make a world of difference if someone is after you with a Mind Control, so you haven't got a real basis for a straight comparison.

 

The point I make is that a cost decision has been made, and changing what the characteristics do is changing the implications of that decision. It isn't 'wrong' if everyone in your game has equal access to the option, but I'd be surprised if it ever went official. Still, odder things have happened...

 

It would also have implications for the way in which characters are built: you would have higher average EGO if yuo increase utility without increasing cost, which might effect the game in ways you hadn't thought of. Take PRE attacks: why buy a high PRE if you already have a high EGO? If you want to do PRE attacks, buy 'attack only' PRE, and PRE attacks generally would be less effective. I'm sure there are plently of examples I haven't even considered.

 

On the munchkin build point, yes, I know, but that doesn't mean we should be making it easy for them now, does it?

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Yet unlike INT or PRE or any other stat EGO (like DEX) is used to calculate a combat value. So making it target a power other than standard mental powers is not that strange. It is also not going to alter anything since the opposition is still going to be defending in the standard way (ie DEX based DCV).

 

It isn't free because like Agent X said, the character in mind has probably already dumped considerable points on DEX and CON. My suggestion fixes your dreaded STAT inflation and creates more concept balanced PCs. EGO targeting makes sense for a lot of concepts and the give and take of advantage and disadvantage seems to even out in my book.

 

For a guy that opens up a lot of "HERO does things wrong" threads you seem to have a serious problem grasping what alot of people seem to agree is a good idea. That said I love the debates you provoke.

 

Hawksmoor

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

...however' date=' that isn't the way it is done in the system you've chosen to play. Ego doesn't target non-mental attacks, why is that hard to understand? [/quote']

 

To turn the question around, TRL, the system we have all chosen to play (or, perhaps more accurately, the toolbox from which we all draw the components for the system we play) is governed by the "meta-rule" that special effects are important.

 

I agree with you - DEX is used to target physical attacks, and EGO is used to target mental attacks. But what is a "mental attack"? A burst of telekinetic energy (Energy Blast vs PD) seems to me to be a mental attack. Perhaps one might call it a "brain bolt". Telekinesis means "moving objects with thoughts" - isn't classic telekinesis also a mental attack?

 

But we can certainly enforce the mechanics - in fact, if we don't draw a line and enforce mechanics somewhere, we have no sructure at all. The question, however, is where to draw that line. Many of us feel that "targeting with Ego" vs "Targeting with DEX" should be more of a function of the power itself, and that there is no significant advantage (costing problem) with allowing a "mental power" built with a "physical construct" to target using EGO.

 

None of us, however, (that I've seen) believe the target should dodge based on EGO, or that the attack should be against mental defense. These would be advantages.

 

One could draw the line closer in. In fact, one culd draw the line in close enough that Energy Blasts are expected to affect ED, and if you want them to affect PD, you must pay a +3/4 advantage (just like switching an attack from being vs Power Defense to attacking Mental defense).

 

HKA's should, of course, target PD - they are backed up by STR, after all, and STR targets PD. You want a laser sword HKA that targets ED? OK, but it will cost you a +3/4 advantage to change the "default setting" of HKA. And it should cost the same +3/4 whether you have a 4d6 HKA, plus 1/2d6 for your 10 STR, or whether you have a 2d6 +1 HKA and add to 4 1/2d6 with your 35 STR, right?

 

Is it any less "logical" that the default targetting statistic be permitted to be altered between two stats used to target different types of atacks, than that attacks may select two different defense types to be applied against at no extra cost?

 

[ASIDE: I'd toast the +3/4 advantage for changing between exotic defenses as well - a Flash vs Mental Defenses is no more powerful than a Flash vs Flash Defense, so why should it cost 75% more?]

[Sean Waters]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

Yet unlike INT or PRE or any other stat EGO (like DEX) is used to calculate a combat value. So making it target a power other than standard mental powers is not that strange. It is also not going to alter anything since the opposition is still going to be defending in the standard way (ie DEX based DCV).

 

It isn't free because like Agent X said, the character in mind has probably already dumped considerable points on DEX and CON. My suggestion fixes your dreaded STAT inflation and creates more concept balanced PCs. EGO targeting makes sense for a lot of concepts and the give and take of advantage and disadvantage seems to even out in my book.

 

For a guy that opens up a lot of "HERO does things wrong" threads you seem to have a serious problem grasping what alot of people seem to agree is a good idea. That said I love the debates you provoke.

 

Hawksmoor

__________________

 

Hell, I just like arguing!

 

I daresay if someone suggested we use DEX to calculate OCV and DCV I'd find an objection to that! Hang on.....

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

I think the point is that at most it is a +1/4 Advantage (BoECV, std. range, std. defenses, no desolid), but for that you actually get to target DECV (5ER 253). That is BoECV costs. That is 100% by the rules so that is our upper boundary. You can certainly refute the value of that, mathematically or canonically, as you can any other rule in the book. However, I think this is not that valuable, relatively speaking, since you are, at a minimum, allowing the target to defend with DCV and subjecting yourself to cover modifiers, shields, and other circumstantial DCV modifiers that would NOT apply to the +1/4 BoECV targeted version. Further, by expanding the power's visibility and susceptability to adjustment powers (although the adj. powers are more of a wash because beneficial adj. powers could apply as well) it becomes even less valuable.

 

Since the lower bound is a +0 standard OCV targeted attack, the question is whether the value of the advantage has reduced its utility to or below the half-way point betwen +0 and +1/4. This seems like a perfect "subject to GM's discretion" point, but considering all the mitigating factors highlighted above it seems clear to me that it is at least at the half-way point, which then makes me inclined to say, "round in the player's favor".

 

We're not changing initiative or any other aspect. Yes, it does give a mentalist a relative edge they did not have before (without paying a +1/4) advantage, but I would argue that they just didn't buy those powers before, sticking with standard mental powers in spite of the cool character concept it might introduce.

 

I'm just trying to bring it around to the fact that you can already do this, by the book. This just offers one more way to handle it, with less of an impact on the game than paying the +1/4 advantage.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

To turn the question around, TRL, the system we have all chosen to play (or, perhaps more accurately, the toolbox from which we all draw the components for the system we play) is governed by the "meta-rule" that special effects are important.

 

I agree with you - DEX is used to target physical attacks, and EGO is used to target mental attacks. But what is a "mental attack"? A burst of telekinetic energy (Energy Blast vs PD) seems to me to be a mental attack. Perhaps one might call it a "brain bolt". Telekinesis means "moving objects with thoughts" - isn't classic telekinesis also a mental attack?

 

But we can certainly enforce the mechanics - in fact, if we don't draw a line and enforce mechanics somewhere, we have no sructure at all. The question, however, is where to draw that line. Many of us feel that "targeting with Ego" vs "Targeting with DEX" should be more of a function of the power itself, and that there is no significant advantage (costing problem) with allowing a "mental power" built with a "physical construct" to target using EGO.

 

None of us, however, (that I've seen) believe the target should dodge based on EGO, or that the attack should be against mental defense. These would be advantages.

 

One could draw the line closer in. In fact, one culd draw the line in close enough that Energy Blasts are expected to affect ED, and if you want them to affect PD, you must pay a +3/4 advantage (just like switching an attack from being vs Power Defense to attacking Mental defense).

 

HKA's should, of course, target PD - they are backed up by STR, after all, and STR targets PD. You want a laser sword HKA that targets ED? OK, but it will cost you a +3/4 advantage to change the "default setting" of HKA. And it should cost the same +3/4 whether you have a 4d6 HKA, plus 1/2d6 for your 10 STR, or whether you have a 2d6 +1 HKA and add to 4 1/2d6 with your 35 STR, right?

 

Is it any less "logical" that the default targetting statistic be permitted to be altered between two stats used to target different types of atacks, than that attacks may select two different defense types to be applied against at no extra cost?

 

[ASIDE: I'd toast the +3/4 advantage for changing between exotic defenses as well - a Flash vs Mental Defenses is no more powerful than a Flash vs Flash Defense, so why should it cost 75% more?]

 

OK, I agree...with most of what you're saying (certainly on switching between exotic defences. Maybe +1/4 for the novelty effect?)

 

...one question though before I wave the white flag.

 

Is the 'targetting with EGO' going to increase the chance of hitting without an increase in cost? Is it going to let you build your chosen concept for less?

 

OK that was two questions, but they had related sfx. If the answer is yes I'm still thinking 'something for nothing', but like I say, so long as everyone gets an equal crack of the whip and you are alive to the potential consequences (like the effect on Presence attacks and the increased utility of mentalists), go hog wild.

 

(I couldn't find a white flag, we'll have to assume that's two white flags!)

[Constantine]

Re: Why the heck not?

 

That not a white flag! That's mocking! MOCKING!