Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

OK, let's go over this one more time. I buy a 120 point END battery with 500 charges. That costs 24 points (12 x 2).

 

OK, got it now.

 

Absolutely (on both conts). However, what this exercise really demonstrates is that the Hero rules are more an art than a science. They can't just be blindly applied. Judgement must be exercised in their application.

 

...mind you I don't think blindness would be such a problem in this instance if we didn't have what, on analysis, seems to be a pretty silly interpretation in the FAQ. All we need to do is make it clear that charges are the number of times you can access a power, and not have a special rule for END Reserves so they work differently from everything else.

[Mentor]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

How are we at an impasse? You agreed with me that having all powers with 0 End for a cost of 4 points was broken' date=' and you house ruled it away and said you would ban any player who would try it. At what point are we disagreeing?[/quote']

I view the GM role in maintaining campaign balance and the requirement that SFX and concept be solidly integrated into the campaign as covered and defined by the rules to ameliorate and compensate for those rules which might be perceived as broken out in theoretical limbo, not as as external to the rules.

 

We really do just have an honest difference in perception, Gary. My interest in theoretical mathematics has always been nil, but applied to astronomy or physics in a concrete and applicable function, I always have risen to the challenge and become adept at its practical utility. The abstract concepts are simply less relevant to me, and mathematics is far more absolute than a gaming system.

 

I am not saying that either approach is necessarily wrong, just that we are coming from to very different viewpoints.

[Guyon]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Ask any play that has lost his focus if he thinks it was too cheap to buy?

 

My opinion is that anyone that thinks a focus is too cheep have never had a villain try to take one away. Which is sort fun playing to try and get it back. Assuming the Villain doesn't break it!!!!!!! :-O

[JmOz]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Have not read the whole thread, just kind of skimmed it

 

Dan is right, charges max out at +1. In my game I actualy max it out at the cost of buying it at 0 end (Continuing charges add +1/2 because they add uncontrolable, Autofire is +1, total max of +.5 to +1.5 depending on AF or Continuing). I think the original ruling has to do with simplicity...

 

1/3, 1/2, etc... I think it is an important note that the inconveinence can be greater than a certain number of times:

 

I don't have time to change into my PA but stop a mugging (2-3 normals, no problem) is a fun diversion, chance to shine w/o armor, and is a slight risk

 

I've lost my PA and have to escape a base of agent level guys (Who I can still take 2-3 at a time) is difficult

 

I have to fight a super villain W/O PA: Okay this is tough

 

I have to go against Dr D...Well I better start making a new character...

 

Depending on the story arc you might only loose your foci for one fight, but the sheer inconveinence of loosing it THEN makes up for the fact that you still use it 90% of the time

[RDU Neil]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Depending on the story arc you might only loose your foci for one fight, but the sheer inconveinence of loosing it THEN makes up for the fact that you still use it 90% of the time

 

This is the general player reaction. Four years after the fact, they are still talking about when Gearhead got caught out of armor and hand to fight VIPER agents who had invaded the base in his bathrobe and Pikachu slippers. It was one of two times that I ever really capitalized on the "out of armor" limitation to a great degree... and mostly because the player was comfortable and somewhat enjoyed the occasional "caught with his pants down" scenario.

 

As a GM, though, I had to contend with that 90% of the time when Gearhead was throwing around more DC... more/different powers... more defenses... because he had more relative points to spend compared to other players.

 

I do think this is a player vs. GM view of things. Players always remember the one time they got screwed as if it was the defining moment... while failing to remember the 99% of the time they kick ass and take names because they are a notch more powerful than everyone else.

[Mentor]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

My PC was caught out of his Power Armor by European neo nazis, who were armed with automatic weapons. As he couldn't possibly beat them, he was captured and taken to a ship to be incarcerated, whereupon he used his skills based on his Secret ID as a billionaire playbo to negotiate the unusual sections of the ship, put on the scuba gear in the secret diving chamber and swim back to the mansion. When he donned his armor and returned to the fjord where the ship had been, it was gone. There were enough clues to what the mastermind villain was after and the experience ultimately openned up a new campaign arc.

 

At no time did I feel screwed as a player or character, even though Cyberknight never fougt and his alter ego, Dr. Erik Thorssen was captured without a shot being fired.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

My PC was caught out of his Power Armor by European neo nazis, who were armed with automatic weapons. As he couldn't possibly beat them, he was captured and taken to a ship to be incarcerated, whereupon he used his skills based on his Secret ID as a billionaire playbo to negotiate the unusual sections of the ship, put on the scuba gear in the secret diving chamber and swim back to the mansion. When he donned his armor and returned to the fjord where the ship had been, it was gone. There were enough clues to what the mastermind villain was after and the experience ultimately openned up a new campaign arc.

 

At no time did I feel screwed as a player or character, even though Cyberknight never fougt and his alter ego, Dr. Erik Thorssen was captured without a shot being fired.

 

Sounds cool... but also sounds like a GM plot created specifically to give your character a challenge, using the armorless-ness as a plot device... but also providing the perfect story for the character to still shine out of armor. Sounds like a solo adventure as well.

 

This is great... but it is nothing like taking the armor away while the rest of the superteam battles on at full power and armorless man just hides.

 

See, if a GM screws armor man over... but then has to spend the time coming up with clever story elements so that armorman-without-armor is still effective and integral to the story... well, that wasn't really a limitation on the character, now was it. In fact it was DOUBLE THE WORK on the GM. The GM had to come up with the plot and story to take away the armor... AND come up with elements to make the PC still be useful.

 

This does kind of hit on a hot-button issue for me... the rather common assumption that the GM isn't doing his job if he isn't penalizing for focus... while at the same time, the GM isn't doing his job if he isn't making the game fun for the players... so the GM is given a lose/lose situation, while the players sit back and complain while eathing the chips and driking the pop that the GM bought for them.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Sounds cool... but also sounds like a GM plot created specifically to give your character a challenge, using the armorless-ness as a plot device... but also providing the perfect story for the character to still shine out of armor. Sounds like a solo adventure as well.

 

This is great... but it is nothing like taking the armor away while the rest of the superteam battles on at full power and armorless man just hides.

I also ran an adventure which Cyberknight and entire our team participated in where the bad guy had cast a magic spell over Manhattan Island which slowly destroyed technology (among other even nastier effects). The more sophisticated the tech, the faster it failed. Guess whose powered armor is "bleeding edge" technology?

 

As the spell progressed the armor's abilities began to fail one by one as the team fought its way through packs of werewolves and a dragon in the sewers. By the time Cyberknight and the rest of MidGuard reached the center of the bad guy's plot at the desecrated St. Patrick's Cathedral, the only thing that still worked on his powered armor was Armor and less than half of his super strength. But he led the team through the heart of New York, never faltered, never complained, and ultimately it was Cyberknight who threw the evil sorcerer through the dimensional gateway to Hell and ended the spell. A bad guy, I should mention, who ignored Cyberknight in the climactic battle because he knew Cyberknight was "no threat without his powered armor."

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

This does kind of hit on a hot-button issue for me... the rather common assumption that the GM isn't doing his job if he isn't penalizing for focus... while at the same time, the GM isn't doing his job if he isn't making the game fun for the players... so the GM is given a lose/lose situation, while the players sit back and complain while eathing the chips and driking the pop that the GM bought for them.

 

Spike the pop. They'll have more fun then.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Sounds cool... but also sounds like a GM plot created specifically to give your character a challenge' date=' using the armorless-ness as a plot device... but also providing the perfect story for the character to still shine out of armor. [/quote']

 

This could be said of a lot of limitations or disadvantages. "it's not night so my Dark-only charcter is hosed". "The GM ran enough encounters that I'm out of charges. My character is hosed." "I can't change into hero ID. My character is hosed." "I can't leave the wedding without compromising my secret ID. My character is hosed."

 

OR

 

"Oh the GM gave him a way to succeed anyway so he didn't really get penalized. Limitations and disadvantages are just free points."

[RDU Neil]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Sounds like fun... in a Kulan Gath kinda way.

 

A bad guy, I should mention, who ignored Cyberknight in the climactic battle because he knew Cyberknight was "no threat without his powered armor."

 

Also sounds like a clear GM decision to still allow Cyberknight to be effective, even without his power. A mechanic level liability nullified by Play Experience level GM decision making.

 

Don't get me wrong... I do this kind of thing all the time, myself. I think it is an important part of being a fair and balanced GM... (oh God... I'm part of Fox News now!! Shoot me! ) But at the same time, this is what I mean by "not really being a limitation." The character isn't really limited, because the story bends around the loss of the focus to make everything ok.

 

What I really want to hear is how often Cyberknight/Mentor has to say, "Gee guys... without my armor, I was really a fifth wheel. I really held you guys back and almost got you all killed. Sorry about that."

 

Now THAT is a limitation being a limitation. But if such a thing happened with any regularity, I'd think the player would be unhappy quite a bit unless they had some masochistic tendencies. "I'm only happy when I suck... "

 

Now... if you read "Limitation" as meaning "Affected by the game/story more than other things"... rather than simply "limiting." That is understandable. Now we are back in the theoretical level... as with Disadvantages, they are not really a lessening of the character, as much as handing over plot hooks to the GM.

 

(Of course, now we are treading on Amber territory again... because that means that theoretically Limitations are nothing more than "Strings Attached" to a power/skill/part of a character. I don't know if we want to get into that.)

 

Also... this points out another way to evaluate Limitations. How much does the "work around" disrupt Play Experience?

 

Example: OIF Man loses armor five minutes into the game, the story can be subtly bent over the course of the evening to keep the character in the game, effective and alive. Players may not notice at all.

 

Example 2: 14 Or Less Man fails his armor activation and the sniper bullet flat out kills him five minutes into the game... if the GM wants to "work around" this limitation coming into play he has to totally shatter the Play Experience to figure out how to keep 14 Or Less Man in the game, effective and alive.

 

In the above case, OIF Man isn't nearly as limited as 14 Or Less Man and this tends to be the case over years of play... in my experience.

 

YMMV and probably does.

[Vondy]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

One of the central pillars of the Hero System is the Imperial Power and (hopefully) Magesterial Wisdom of the Game Master.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

This could be said of a lot of limitations or disadvantages. "it's not night so my Dark-only charcter is hosed". "The GM ran enough encounters that I'm out of charges. My character is hosed." "I can't change into hero ID. My character is hosed." "I can't leave the wedding without compromising my secret ID. My character is hosed."

 

OR

 

"Oh the GM gave him a way to succeed anyway so he didn't really get penalized. Limitations and disadvantages are just free points."

 

 

Yep. A different way of stating what my next post was about. Some Limitations end up... in Play Experience... being "free points" where other Limitations are truly limiting. That is the core issue behind my originally starting this thread... that focus limitations, inaccessible focuses in particular... IN MY EXPERIENCE... aren't really limiting. They often tend to end up being "free points."

 

But to your post... "Free points" or not is a very subjective concept.

[Guyon]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

I don't think that a GM should ever put a character in a spot to "hose" him, nor do I let a character off easy, from a situation that he got himself into. If a player sees too much GM control it leaves him with the feeling of either hopelessness of being controlled, or the sence that he can do anything without out any repercussions. I once played in a game where it was impossible to lose or die, it was the most boring game that I have ever played.

 

I still feel that the focus is not over priced, as it can be taken away, and that should worry a character from time to time. After all it is a disadvantage.

[Guyon]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Am I getting the feeling that in some games players don't roleplay their disadvantages, or GM do not bring them in to play?

 

That is half the fun in character development.

[tesuji]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Don't get me wrong... I do this kind of thing all the time, myself. I think it is an important part of being a fair and balanced GM... (oh God... I'm part of Fox News now!! Shoot me! ) But at the same time, this is what I mean by "not really being a limitation." The character isn't really limited, because the story bends around the loss of the focus to make everything ok.

 

two things on this...

 

first, one issue is the scope of the lim. HERo goes into this under limited power IIRC. Its usually not good to allow an overarching all encompassing lim, because its often that enforcing the lim is too great a swipe to be done as a matter of a usual scenario. They state this about things like "only at night" but of course, POWERED ARMOR seems to be a genre specific exception.

 

One approach i used more often than not with PA characters was to have indivudal powers break frequently and armor wear down and get repaired so that other than the "you have had some time off and now..." it was actually rare for everything on the suit to be working at the same time.

 

Second, this is why i have come to prefer the pay-as-you-screw basis, where you don't get points in advance for "limitations" but instead get Xp bonus AFTER a session when your "limitation" hinders you noticeably. When your SFX is just a plot device but doesn't hinder you, thats just story. if the challenge i scripted is one that will be solved by your skills and brains, and not your powers, then "i am out of my armor" is just flavor.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

I don't think that a GM should ever put a character in a spot to "hose" him, nor do I let a character off easy, from a situation that he got himself into. If a player sees too much GM control it leaves him with the feeling of either hopelessness of being controlled, or the sence that he can do anything without out any repercussions. I once played in a game where it was impossible to lose or die, it was the most boring game that I have ever played.

 

I still feel that the focus is not over priced, as it can be taken away, and that should worry a character from time to time. After all it is a disadvantage.

 

I agree, but there is a fine line... very blurry, between a GM being expected to "enforce a limitation" and "hosing" a character. It is all perception... and very muddy ground.

 

My concern is that "good GMs" (and yes, good is subjective) will err on the side of NOT enforcing the full limitation, because it would be hosing... so that players who take limitations on their characters are really no more/no less the focus of difficulties than the players who didn't take limitations.

 

Essentially, all players have challenges presented to them that are based around who and what the character is... but SOME players get a point break for who and what their characers are, others don't.

 

It really does get into Play Styles. If you have generic Adventure X where you can insert Generic Char 1, 2 and 3. If Adventure X happens to have elements that trigger Gen Char #2's limitations... then for this adventure, Gen Char. #2 is less effective. Limitation points earned.

 

That is pretty theoretical, and follows a long outmoded game design platform where adventures were designed to have any random characters inserted. (The module concept.)

 

These days... or at least in more mature play groups... adventures are designed AROUND the specific characters. You design an adventure specifically to challenge the known characters, thus the expectation is to base what happens in the adventure around the ability of the character to handle it/interests them as players. Thus, while a Limitation may be priced with the concept of "generically 1/3 of the time it will be limiting to a character" the fact is that stories/games are designed "non-generically" so if it was affecting the character it was planned... if it DIDN'T affect the character, this was planned. So why does one person get a point break for "being affected by the story" and another doesn't?

 

Of course, random events do spring up occassionally that trigger limitations in the course of games... but I would argue this happens much less often than the amount of points saved would indicate with Limitations like Inaccesible Foci.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

two things on this...

 

first, one issue is the scope of the lim. HERo goes into this under limited power IIRC. Its usually not good to allow an overarching all encompassing lim, because its often that enforcing the lim is too great a swipe to be done as a matter of a usual scenario. They state this about things like "only at night" but of course, POWERED ARMOR seems to be a genre specific exception.

 

One approach i used more often than not with PA characters was to have indivudal powers break frequently and armor wear down and get repaired so that other than the "you have had some time off and now..." it was actually rare for everything on the suit to be working at the same time.

 

Second, this is why i have come to prefer the pay-as-you-screw basis, where you don't get points in advance for "limitations" but instead get Xp bonus AFTER a session when your "limitation" hinders you noticeably. When your SFX is just a plot device but doesn't hinder you, thats just story. if the challenge i scripted is one that will be solved by your skills and brains, and not your powers, then "i am out of my armor" is just flavor.

 

And this is a fascinating Game Rules level interpretation of a mechanic... one that is deviating quite a bit from the original build... but could very well work for a group, depending on their play style. Great example. Different in execution, but the same in concept as changing the Focus limitation to be 0, -1/4, or -1/2 to fit a Game. Both are deviations from core mechanics to better create a Play Experience you want in your game.

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Example: OIF Man loses armor five minutes into the game, the story can be subtly bent over the course of the evening to keep the character in the game, effective and alive. Players may not notice at all.

 

Example 2: 14 Or Less Man fails his armor activation and the sniper bullet flat out kills him five minutes into the game... if the GM wants to "work around" this limitation coming into play he has to totally shatter the Play Experience to figure out how to keep 14 Or Less Man in the game, effective and alive.

 

In the above case, OIF Man isn't nearly as limited as 14 Or Less Man and this tends to be the case over years of play... in my experience.

 

YMMV and probably does.

 

Activation seems to be coming up a lot as a comparison. Different limitations come into play different ways. Charges/increased END = player's choice to use the power or not. Activation = up to the dice. Pretty much everything else = GM's call/plot driven.

 

Perhaps one could house rule FOCI to nudge them a little out of the "GM's call" area and a little into the "dice roll" area? Sidestep some of the damage to Foci rules (for Foci with a lot of points in them, it's extremely rare in my experience to actually see them get damaged via the rules as writ). Work out a chart based on the value of the Foci limit to check when appropriate - higher the Foci limit, higher chance something goes wrong.

 

Thor throws his hammer, and the villains with saved phase drop a huge boulder on him. Does Mjolnir return before Thor is pinned under the rock? Make a roll and see.

 

Iron Man's hit by a massive attack. Any systems damaged? Make a roll and see.

 

Starman tries a tricky power stunt with his Cosmic Rod. Might there be a problem? Make a roll and see.

 

Black Knight swings at a villain and misses. Might the Ebony Blade be stuck in the I-beam behind the villain? Make a roll and see.

 

There'd still be a good deal of GM involvement, but some of the blame for the character getting "hosed" would fall to the dice, as it does for an Activation roll.

 

Maybe something like:

OAF: 14-

IAF/OIF: 11-

IIF: 8-

 

for a rough example. Or make it a flat roll across the Foci types, as there are presumably more situations when a roll would come into play for an OAF than for an IIF (It's easier to screw with Swordsman's sword than to interfere with someone's bionics).

 

Could also use if at a "random" point, to determine if it would be inappropriate for the hero to have his Foci on/be in hero ID, etc. "Ok, start of game, everyone's communicators goes off. Iron Man, make a check." "Dang! A seven!" "Ok, Tony Stark's in the middle of a board meeting, and the armor's upstairs in his office. Whatchagonna do?"

[RDU Neil]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Activation seems to be coming up a lot as a comparison. Different limitations come into play different ways. Charges/increased END = player's choice to use the power or not. Activation = up to the dice. Pretty much everything else = GM's call/plot driven.

 

Perhaps one could house rule FOCI to nudge them a little out of the "GM's call" area and a little into the "dice roll" area? Sidestep some of the damage to Foci rules (for Foci with a lot of points in them, it's extremely rare in my experience to actually see them get damaged via the rules as writ). Work out a chart based on the value of the Foci limit to check when appropriate - higher the Foci limit, higher chance something goes wrong.

 

Thor throws his hammer, and the villains with saved phase drop a huge boulder on him. Does Mjolnir return before Thor is pinned under the rock? Make a roll and see.

 

Iron Man's hit by a massive attack. Any systems damaged? Make a roll and see.

 

Starman tries a tricky power stunt with his Cosmic Rod. Might there be a problem? Make a roll and see.

 

Black Knight swings at a villain and misses. Might the Ebony Blade be stuck in the I-beam behind the villain? Make a roll and see.

 

There'd still be a good deal of GM involvement, but some of the blame for the character getting "hosed" would fall to the dice, as it does for an Activation roll.

 

Maybe something like:

OAF: 14-

IAF/OIF: 11-

IIF: 8-

 

for a rough example. Or make it a flat roll across the Foci types, as there are presumably more situations when a roll would come into play for an OAF than for an IIF (It's easier to screw with Swordsman's sword than to interfere with someone's bionics).

 

Could also use if at a "random" point, to determine if it would be inappropriate for the hero to have his Foci on/be in hero ID, etc. "Ok, start of game, everyone's communicators goes off. Iron Man, make a check." "Dang! A seven!" "Ok, Tony Stark's in the middle of a board meeting, and the armor's upstairs in his office. Whatchagonna do?"

 

 

On a theoretical level, I really like this. It does tend to "even things out" a bit in terms of Limitation worth.

 

On a practical level, I'm probably not comfortable with so many role playing situations being mechanically driven... but...

 

What might be interesting is to have this kind of chart as a "Guideline" for how often things happen. Some GMs might use it all the time, wishing to avoid being decision makers... others never, or once in a blue moon when the random "available or not" is an dramatic swing in the story that could go either way.

 

Hmmmm... I'd fall lin the latter category, but I like the idea.

[tesuji]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

BTW, I just cannot let a focus fixing/issues discussion go by without mentioning what is IMO one of if not the biggest focus discrepancy...

 

to paraphrase... any focus which provides defenses is automatically hit by an attack that the defense applies against and this focus/defense is outside/on top of the defenses.

 

this is a freebie, not worth any value, and it means that my force field ring OIF providing 15/15 ff is always hit by an attack against me "for free" while my ring of flight oif cannot be attacked in combat (normally) and damaged that way at even. even with deliberate attention.

 

This, IMO, meeds to be an option chosen when you buy the power, not the default. it makes sense for armor, not necessarily for force field beltas an example.

 

Also, this is not a "no points" feature at all. Except for unbreakable foci, it will impact the odds of getting broken in combat pretty severely.

 

returning you to your otherwise normal thread now.

[David Blue]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Let's not forget that the greatest limitation of all is simply not having enough power, in context. And the way to not have power is not to take the limitations that some people are saying are so tough. "Straight/plain vanilla/iconic/non-munchkined/unlimited" is the worst limitation.

 

This limitation is enforced all the time, automatically. Being always a few dice, a few combat value levels, a dozen or so armour points and a few speed pips off the pace is a very harsh limitation. It has a lot to do with your character's chance of earning legendary status.

 

Think your character suffers too much concern that someone might some day take away his twelve dice obvious inaccessible focus energy blast? Then go for glory! With an 8d6 energy blast not so limited. And so on.

[David Blue]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

OK, this is only from my experience but - yes, foci can drive everything else out of the game, in time. Very easily. Not just in one game but repeatedly, with different gamemasters. Even the team Batman clone may develop a super-focus like a "Battle-Staff"â„¢ that totally takes over the character sheet. Because you have to do that to keep within a reasonable distance of the dominating totally-limited focus-dweebs.

 

Whether this is fun depends on what kinds of characters you like and have adventure ideas for.

 

(Though if your adventure and roleplaying ideas run to what will work best for the focused-up characters, I think there's a case for restricting the number of player characters to the number of focused-up characters you're willing to allow. Don't have any player characters that will have less power and an uninterested gamemaster.)

[David Blue]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Having talked before from a gamemaster's point of view, I'll say as a player, I don't find focus-dweebs heaps of fun. I don't respect them, and I don't want to play one. But I also don't like how their floods of free points can ratchet the power level of the game easily beyond what I would regard as more satisfactory heroes' ability to be effective/heroic.

 

(Damage caps, if "hard"/inflexible/genuinely applied, can bring some sweet relief, though not total. I might have a kinder opinion of foci if I had seen damage caps brought in on games where the focus-dweebs took over. If.)

 

"The rules" say you shouldn't make a character built totally to work at night, or by day, or whatever. But if you're in a party with focus-dweebs, you'd be wise to do that, if you were allowed to. Because that would get you into the game some of the time, instead of being shut out of the top level all the time.

 

When focus-dweebs dominate the power level of the game - which they will when villains are written to challenge the greatest heroes, which will be them - there are really only two power levels: dweeb and non-dweeb. Being "hosed" for a scenario is pretty meaningless in a game where it takes a 20d6 attack not to be a wimp. Having a three dice punch is not really different from having a pathetic plain vanilla martial artist's 7d6 punch and 9d6 kick, against opponents with 40+ defences - except that you get credit for it: "Night-Man fights - without his powers!"

 

That's one of the reasons the focus-dweebs don't have to be afraid of being evicted from their armour. First, it doesn't happen. Second, if it did it would be a special scenario written to make the campaign's mightiest hero look good even without his armour. But third, even if they did have to sit around the base and play solitaire, a sufficient power imbalance, which fully munchkined-up, fully-limited focus-dweebs can easily achieve, means: "So, I was useless in that one unique scenario, in years. You guys are useless all the time." To which there is no answer from Plain Jane, but Night-Only-Man does have an answer.

[Mentor]

Re: Focus = Too Great a Price Break?

 

Sounds like fun... in a Kulan Gath kinda way.

 

 

 

Also sounds like a clear GM decision to still allow Cyberknight to be effective, even without his power. A mechanic level liability nullified by Play Experience level GM decision making.

 

Don't get me wrong... I do this kind of thing all the time, myself. I think it is an important part of being a fair and balanced GM... (oh God... I'm part of Fox News now!! Shoot me! ) But at the same time, this is what I mean by "not really being a limitation." The character isn't really limited, because the story bends around the loss of the focus to make everything ok.

 

What I really want to hear is how often Cyberknight/Mentor has to say, "Gee guys... without my armor, I was really a fifth wheel. I really held you guys back and almost got you all killed. Sorry about that."

 

Now THAT is a limitation being a limitation. But if such a thing happened with any regularity, I'd think the player would be unhappy quite a bit unless they had some masochistic tendencies. "I'm only happy when I suck... "

 

Now... if you read "Limitation" as meaning "Affected by the game/story more than other things"... rather than simply "limiting." That is understandable. Now we are back in the theoretical level... as with Disadvantages, they are not really a lessening of the character, as much as handing over plot hooks to the GM.

 

(Of course, now we are treading on Amber territory again... because that means that theoretically Limitations are nothing more than "Strings Attached" to a power/skill/part of a character. I don't know if we want to get into that.)

 

Also... this points out another way to evaluate Limitations. How much does the "work around" disrupt Play Experience?

 

Example: OIF Man loses armor five minutes into the game, the story can be subtly bent over the course of the evening to keep the character in the game, effective and alive. Players may not notice at all.

 

Example 2: 14 Or Less Man fails his armor activation and the sniper bullet flat out kills him five minutes into the game... if the GM wants to "work around" this limitation coming into play he has to totally shatter the Play Experience to figure out how to keep 14 Or Less Man in the game, effective and alive.

 

In the above case, OIF Man isn't nearly as limited as 14 Or Less Man and this tends to be the case over years of play... in my experience.

 

YMMV and probably does.

A couple of points.

 

We have all played in campaigns where the PC who had their limitations used whined as if they were being singled out. The players in our campaign trust the GMs (Trebuchet is not the only GM who runs scenarios in this campaign) not to hose the player or character. On the other hand, the GMs expect the players not to do something stupid, at risk of harm and embarassment to the characters.

 

In the example Treb gave, he was only able to set up the situation. He did not, nor could he, cause me to play Cyberknight in such a way as to be effective. The limitation of the OIF prevented many of the powers from working at all and the rest were limited by 50% except for the armor itself which is physical. Unless one defines an OIF limitation as meaning that the Power Armor should freeze up and paralyze the PC while openning up a door for vulnerability over his heart a la "Life of Brian", that was a pretty good use of the limitation. The difference was that my character's concept and personality was such that, given the horrendous and immediate nature of the threat, he was willing to be hurt or die in order to save the world from a Demonic ruler. Giving the PC a chance for a do or die situation is necessary for the GM. Superhero is a compound word defined as both Super and Hero. It is unfair and unreasonable to suggest that the only reason the Hero was able to do instead of die was GM fudging. In addition, given the nature of a team, his comrades were willing and able to step up to compensate for Cyberknight's weaknesses and allow him to bypass the werewolf guardians and throw the evil mastermind into the mystic portal.

 

My main point is that the GM can only "manipulate" events to keep the PA guy effective if the player is willing and able to play him that way. 14 or less man only loses one blast of one punch or one phase worth of force field in an average battle, but failed Power Armor is down until he fixes it or gets out of the limiting or even harmful environment.

 

The game balance is determined by playing the game, not comparing the possible misuses of the construction of the PC.