Teleportation, really that different?

[Mike W]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

But does it say anywhere that it happens on the same Phase the attack roll is made? Almost always (only exception I can think of is a Leap)' date=' once you make an attack roll, your Phase is over. Following that logic, all the target would have to do is walk away to negate the touch. Sure, you don't [i']have[/i] to Grab the target, but it sure helps keep them from wanding away while you're getting ready to teleport.

 

Actually, that would depend on the relative SPDs of the characters. Teleporters, in my experience, usually get built with an above average SPD and DEX, often much above average. Call it the Nightcrawler effect if you want. So, for example, a 6 SPD Nightcrawler can elect to go last on 6, then teleport someone with a lower SPD away at the top of 8 when no one goes on 7(a 5 SPD character with a higher DEX, not very common, could get an action on 8). Unless, you want to allow a "dive for cover" maneuver against an attack roll that has already taken place which, doesn't fit into the game well. You don't normally get your DCV and then "dive for cover" if it hits. And like I said, in my experience, characters with Teleport as their main combat movement are usually toward the high end of the SPD and DEX charts, so this could actually be a common occurence. A 6 SPD character in a campaign where most characters are 4-5 SPD could pull this trick on their 6 and 10 phases consistently, arguably on 12, and also have a shot on 2,4, and 8 where another character would have to interpose, depending on the target's SPD. Better odds than trying to Haymaker.

[beauxdeigh]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Alright, Mike, you have me frustrated. I don't think you actually do me the honor of actually reading my posts, you just skim them and, once you think you understand, you respond. It's causing problems. Like this one:

The book is actually slightly unclear on this. As you pointed out' date=' under Increased Mass, it says that the target must be willing, but the generic text does not specifically say that (though it does refer you to the Increased Mass adder).[/quote']

In Fred' date=' the description for the increased mass adder says "the character does not have to be able to carry this additional mass; [i']he only has to touch it[/i] " It then states that you need UAA to target another person. NOWHERE does it say you need an actual grab. Only a standard hit roll. And the wording would imply that even if you were willing to do away with the "must have UAA" for teleporters who were willing to go with the target, they still wouldn't need an actual grab maneuver, just a normal "strike" maneuver, which means that they wouldn't have to take the -1 OCV and -2 DCV penalties that a character making a Grab roll would have to take.

Both I and Dust Raven know it says nothing about having to Grab. In fact, I think we would gladly cede that point. According to the rules in 5ER you just have to touch. No Grab. None.

 

OK?

 

Does that work for you?

 

Before I move on I want to be sure this point is clear:

 

5ER does not require a Grab. It requires a touch, possibly a Zero Phase touch, and UAA to take someone involuntarily. I am in no way attempting to interpret the rules on p234 as requiring a Grab. Ever. I do not read the rules that way. However, I think this rule that Steve has written is crap. I think it is unfairly penalizing Teleport. I am working on a solution that will make myself and my game happy. THAT'S IT.

 

No on to the rest of your points...

[Mike W]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

I do read your posts.

 

But the second quote was a direct response to a question by Dust Raven.

Not you.(Post #23 to be precise). I was arguing that part of the bonus teleport gets from needing only "touch" is that you wouldn't necessarily need to make an actual grab roll and take the penalties for it that someone with a different movement would HAVE to execute.

 

As for the first, I merely stated that the book was slightly unclear on the point and then offered a reason about why it might be written as is.

 

There is no need to be insulting.

[beauxdeigh]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

I think that the reason Teleport operates under different rules is that a person's body is affected differently.

Wholly irrelevant in HERO. Teleport is an effect for a power that can be described a myriad of ways. It can duplicate Star Trek Transporters and moving so fast that people can't see you. There is no set defined effect on the character's body. None.

 

With flight' date=' if I grab someone and then take off, the normal rules of physics apply. But if I try to teleport someone, I have to, say, take apart their body and then reassemble it somewhere else.[/quote']

First of all, physics? What exactly are the physics of Superman's ability to fly while carrying a trawler? Second, you're presuming again. Nightcrawler's Teleport is quickly passing through another dimension. No disassembly reassembly there. Saying anything about how the power Teleport works is like saying that Energy Blast only spouts bursts of flame. HERO doesn't work that way.

 

Teleport being an actual Power' date=' requires you to do much more than just "hang onto them"[/quote']

That would be the crux of my argument. I don't think it should. It hasn't for four previous editions. I think it should work like any other movement power, because all you are doing is moving from one space to another without passing through the intervening space. How you do that is dependent on the character.

 

- so it is treated as if it was an AVLD vs. power defense.

A who to the what now? Validate this statement. Prove to me that in every character's possible interpretation of Teleport that moving an involuntary target along with you is akin to an AVLD vs. Power Defense.

 

So' date=' if you reason from special effect, it makes sense why you would need to buy UAA, even though it isn't perfectly balanced.[/quote']

I was going to say 'horribly broken', but my bias is showing through. Doubling the cost of one Movement power to allow it to do what every other Movement power does, simply because it works a little differently? Once again, I say utter bunk. Teleport already requires the purchaser to pay extra to teleport more than just themself and their costume, something other Movement powers don't have to do.

 

And since Teleport moves you "invisbly" and does not require you to plot a specific course through the various battlefield traffic' date=' I'd say it balances a bit better than it first appears.[/quote']

What about Mr Flight? He can slip the bounds of earth and take someone straight up into the air. X" every phase that he retains his grip on his opponent. I can work out situations for every single type of movement that gives them an advantage. Especially Gliding and Leaping and Swinging, where the 1pt = 1" cost allows their Movement to be huge in comparison.

 

 

After all' date=' if I grab someone and then try to fly off with them, everyone knows which way I went and I may provoke attacks of opportunities when I take off.[/quote']

Attacks of opportunity? What game system are you playing? What if you leap off with someone? With a cost of 46 for both 46" of Leaping and 23" of Teleport, I bet Mr Leaper could easily outrun the competition and vanish just as easily.

 

With teleport' date=' I could grab someone and port into a building down the street with no one having any idea what direction I went, then port again and again - and no one could track me because they would never see which direction I went.[/quote']

Ah, but I have N-Ray Vision! I see every place you go and follow you! Yay me!

 

We could play the game of 'I could' all day long Mike, but you're bringing the environment back into it again. Environments will help or hinder every character based on how they spent their points. Teleport is no different...except for that double cost UAA Advantage thing.

 

Since the teleport essentially has "invisible power effects" built into it' date=' particularly if you are clever about porting, the UAA requirement helps to balance this out.[/quote']

Well, then I could easily make a case for Flight needing UAA too. I mean, after a couple of Phases straight into the air, being let go of could seriously hurt. I think Fliers should have to use Flight UAA to take an unwilling opponent with them, too.

 

You aren't really arguing my points as much as coming up with a whole bunch of circumstances where Teleport works really well. You can do that with any power, except maybe 'Taste, usable at Range'. Every Movement power is a good power. Teleport has its benefit, but it has its limitations built in. This UAA requirement is wholly unecessary when you compare it to other Movement powers and modify it to work like them. I'll be going back to that in my game, and allow my Teleporting Dark Avenger to do that once he buys Increased Mass.

[beauxdeigh]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

There is no need to be insulting.

I apologize. As I said, you have me frustrated. I think that's because we're arguing our stances differently. I'm arguing from 'It does' and you are arguing from 'It could'. So, it never feels like you really address any of my points. We're writing the same language, but we really aren't having a discussion.

 

As for the first' date=' I merely stated that the book was slightly unclear on the point and then offered a reason about why it might be written as is.[/quote']I disagree. I think the book is very precise on this point. There is no lack of clarity. You might think it could be interpreted differently, but it hasn't been.

 

I just think it's a bad rule.

[Mike W]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

True,environment does play into certain circumstances, but how common those circumstances are is a major basis for advantages and limits. "Only works in daylight" is not as big of a limit as "only works on Tuesdays". Both are environmental effects, but they affect the usefulness of the power. So when building any power, Teleport, N-ray vision or anything else, these environmental effects should be taken into account. Heck, you could argue that many of the Enhanced Senses and Hand Attack are already built this way. So if Teleport has more "environmental advantages" than another movement power, it should cost more.

 

And the fact that at least some, if not many, of the special effects result in you doing more than just picking up a character and moving them via flight or leaping is relevant since we are 1. consistently asked to reason from effect - so some expensive powers will be less effective than others at times, just because of the mechanics, and 2. to remember that, especially where attacks and other things that could be potentially abusive are concerned, the most expensive build is the correct one. This is long standing HERO philosophy. So, if there is any doubt about whether Teleport should cost more or less, it costs more.

 

As far as the difficulty of following a flying character, it is generally much less difficult because more people have flight than either teleport or N-ray vision. Or at least, they did in any universe I ever played in or read about. And N-ray vision wouldn't necessarily apply if there was more than one intervening wall/barrier.

 

Attacks of opportunity occur if you have to fly past character with either the same DEX or a held action to get away. With teleport, you can't do this unless you already start next to the teleporter because the teleporter does not have to pass through the intervening space whereas the flier does. Not having to pass through the intervening space and being able to "disappear" as opposed to "fly off" is a BIG advantage. Ask my players. The bad guy teleports, there isn't much chance to chase. Bad guy flies off, the chase is on. And just as importantly(another one of those "environmental effects but again a potentially common one) the teleporter doesn't need an avenue of escape but the flier does.

[beauxdeigh]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

True' date='environment does play into certain circumstances, but how common those circumstances are is a major basis for advantages and limits. [...'] So if Teleport has more "environmental advantages" than another movement power, it should cost more.

It already does. What I don't see is any valid reason for it to cost more than twice as much per inch in all circumstances to sometimes take someone else involuntarily along.

 

And the fact that at least some' date=' if not many, of the special effects result in you doing more than just picking up a character and moving them via flight or leaping is relevant since we are 1. consistently asked to reason from effect - so some expensive powers will be less effective than others at times, just because of the mechanics,[/quote']

Agreed, and that's acceptable. I don't see how making Teleport less than half as effective for the same points all the time is really justified, though. Especially when moving someone involuntarily with any other Movement power has a set way of handling it - requiring the STR to hold them while you move, and that being able to Teleport someone else already requires more points than any other Movement power before the Advantage is thrust upon it.

 

and 2. to remember that' date=' especially where attacks and other things that could be potentially abusive are concerned, the most expensive build is the correct one. This is long standing HERO philosophy. So, if there is any doubt about whether Teleport should cost more or less, it costs more.[/quote']

'The most expensive build is the correct one' - Meta-Rule #6 - I disagree with the long standing status you assign to this particular piece of philosophy. My disdain for this poorly worded, under explained, overblown concept runs deep. I happen to ascribe to the 'Use what fits best' and "Keep it simple' philosophies, but those aren't Meta-Rules. Also, as I've said, Teleport already does cost more, and if you add the requirement of a Grab, then it balances fine. UAA has it's place, but it is hardly a necessary requirement to balance Teleport as a Movement power.

 

Meta-Rule #8: 'Change what you want.' I'm changing this UAA requirement as I've detailed. I think it will best serve my games if I do. Zed-F did me the favor of giving me a good balanced reason for not dropping the extra phase for noncombat teleporting without having to cite a lot of environment specific situations. So, I'm keeping that. I was hoping for something similar on the UAA front. Maybe an actual rules based reason. I'm still not seeing one. The fact that it has worked fine for so long before 5th is probably why.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Remember that the rule about touching someone is also in keeping with the rule about only being able to take willing targets. If I want to teleport myself and my buddy Johnny, shouldn't I be able to simply touch him and go, without making an attack roll and then waiting for my next Phase to teleport? Shouldn't the same be true of Flight? If Johnny is willing, I'll just grab ahold at the beginning of my Phase and take off. If he is not willing, I'm going to have to perform a Grab maneuver and then wait before moving.

 

I think considering the, "touch," as applying even if you try to carry unwilling targets along with you is the wrong way to go. A Grab against an unwilling target seems reasonable as it is in keeping with every other Movement Power. A Strike does not seem reasonable (both in terms of common sense and in terms of game balance).

 

This is all beside the mechanic of requiring an Adder to take additional targets instead of enough Strength; that, as Dust Raven has said, is just a property of Teleport.

 

EDIT: I just realized that with Flight, there is a way of Grabbing your opponent and then moving. You simply perform a Grab By (though technically maybe you have to move at least one hex first?). Anyway, this maneuver isn't technically allowed with Teleport, but I don't see any reason you couldn't allow it (with zero velocity) just in order for the attacker to teleport after the Grab.

[Arkham]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Note that IDHMBIFOM, but I remember either in Force Field

or in the FAQ for same that a Grabbed person was considered

a 'Carried Object', thus protected by Force Fields with

'Protects Carried', as well as being able to be teleported

with nothing more than Extra Mass...

[Mike W]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Well, let's look at it this way: Some power are essentially built as "Other Power X with Advantage Z or Limit Y" e.g - Telekinesis= STR + Ranged, Armor = Force Field + 0 END. Ok, there are some slight differences between the two, but it's pretty close(for instance, you have to buy fine manipulation on TK to do at range some things which STR could do at arm's reach)

 

So let's look at Teleport as if it were Running + ADV and Limits

 

LIMITS(-1 1/2)

 

Teleport cannot do velocity based damage(-1/2 because move through is a lot of character's stand-by haymaker type move)

 

Teleport has no base move or lifting STR, you have to buy every point, running you have base 6" and get base STR(though you have to pay for carrying anything heavier than a normal human at an equal rate) Call it another -1/2

 

Teleport requires a hit roll for "blind" teleporting. Since it occurs as often as the "invisible power effects" uses, it should cancel that one out(-1/4)

 

Teleport has a potential side effect. It's not a major side effect and is only going to happen if the telporter 'ports "blind" and misses(-1/4)

 

ADVANTAGES(+2)

 

Teleport does not have to pass through intervening space. This has a lot of advantages in escaping and maneuvering around a fight in tight quarters. Not to mention bypassing external security devices. I might be undervaluing it a bit here, but we'll call it +1/2.

 

 

Teleport has "invisible power effects" built in, so you are much harder to track. Since this doesn't always come up though, we'll call it +1/4

 

Teleport can move someone vertically, not just horizontally and, unlike other vertical movement powers like leaping and flight, it does not lose inches for gaining altitude, whereas someone with 15" of flight can only fly 8" high at a time. Running only provides vertical movement in unusual circumstances such as speedster who can defy gravity to run up the side of a building(+1/2 because this can be REALLY useful)

 

Teleport never has a turn mode, no matter the terrain, whereas running may require a turn mode for difficult surfaces like ice. (+1/4)

 

Teleport can be used to escape grabs, entangles, and "lock" maneuvers(+1/2)

And again, I might be undervaluing it since the teleporting character is essentially unrestrainable.

 

So Teleport is already getting a +1/2 net advantage over Running, and I may be undervaluing it a bit. But the base cost of teleport is the same as running, so something has to give. The ability to take others with was it.

[Zed-F]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

I don't think you're going to find a lot of people agreeing with you on this one, Mike. I'd also dispute your advantage/limitation analysis, since I'd say the ability to escape basic grabs/entangles and the ability to bypass security devices are both part of the same '+1/2 advantage,' not separate things worth +1/2 each.

 

Grab and teleport someone along with you seems realistic and well-enough balanced to me. It fits with the mechanics of every other movement power. UAA continues to be reserved for making someone else move without moving yourself. Internal consistency within the movement powers is preserved. In short, it's all good. Even if I did think there was a slight imbalance there, making exceptions for the sake of making exceptions is a slippery slope and not good policy.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

I don't think you're going to find a lot of people agreeing with you on this one, Mike. I'd also dispute your advantage/limitation analysis, since I'd say the ability to escape basic grabs/entangles and the ability to bypass security devices are both part of the same '+1/2 advantage,' not separate things worth +1/2 each.

 

Grab and teleport someone along with you seems realistic and well-enough balanced to me. It fits with the mechanics of every other movement power. UAA continues to be reserved for making someone else move without moving yourself. Internal consistency within the movement powers is preserved. In short, it's all good. Even if I did think there was a slight imbalance there, making exceptions for the sake of making exceptions is a slippery slope and not good policy.

Agreed. Mike, I'm sorry but your analysis just has too many Modifiers, most of which are custom and of questionable value and granularity. If you really wanted to do this kind of thing, you should probably forget assigning values and just pair up pros and cons that are pretty obviously of equal value. Whatever was left over could take on the debate over value or whatever. That is about the most complex discussion I think we can even begin to debate. Anything more is just waaay too arbitrary.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

teleportation is a get out of jail free card for 90+% of all entangles, too.

[Mike W]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Whatever, I've said my piece. There's the whole "change what you don't like" rule, and some will change the Teleport rules. Personally, I won't. I like it as is.

 

I would say that "bypassing security" and "escaping entangles" are not the same thing since "bypassing security could let you avoid cameras, go over a high wall, avoid having to trigger a trapped door, and so on. But whatever, as long as people are polite, it's all good. The whole point of threads like this is to have these kinds of debates and see what sticks to the wall... but it isn't much of a debate if someone doesn't play devil's advocate.

[Basil]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

{snip}

I don't even know if TheEmerged had it on his excellent list of 4th to 5th changes.

 

I pulled out my copy of 4th Ed. and gave it a good look. Both on p.87 (under Teleportation) and p.98 (under Usable Against Others) it's clear the writers were only thinking about touch-and-send-away type Teleportation against a target. Neither touch-and-take-with nor Grab-and-take-with type Teleportation against a target were considered.

 

So I'm afraid the ruling on 5th Ed. p.150 (under Increased Mass) is not, *strictly speaking* a change; it's more in the nature of an addition.

[Basil]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

It seems to me the crux of the matter is the complete text of the "increased Mass" adder. Let me quote it in full.

 

Increased mass: This Adder allows a character to Teleport more than the normal amount of mass. For each +5 Character Points he can Teleport 2x normal human mass (100 kg) (thus' date=' for +5 points, 200 kg., +10 points, 400 kg., and so forth). The character does not have to be able to carry this additional mass; he only has to touch it. If the additional mass is additional persons, those persons have to want to be Teleported; involuntarily Teleporting someone requires the [i']Usable As Attack[/i] Advantage.

 

Let me repeat one line, with (I believe) warrented additions that should make things clearer.

 

The character does not have to be able to {physically} carry this additional mass {with his STR}; he only has to touch it.

 

It seems to me that what is being said is: (A) You can Teleport mass above 100 kg, with this Adder. ( You can use this Adder on more mass than you can lift with your own STR. © You have the special permission that you can Teleport this 'extra' mass by merely touching it. (D) This special permission does not apply to involuntary persons (E) To Teleport involuntary person using this special permission you must also buy Usable As Attack

 

I don't see Teleporting an involuntary person without using the special permission as thereby requiring Usable As Attack.

 

Perhaps imposing the requirement that the involuntary person must not only be Grabbed, but also lifted bodily off the ground, might alleviate fears about game balance. Actually, that strikes me as a good idea as Teleporting an involuntary person should require more control over his body than merely pinning him --- IMO, of course.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Actually' date=' that would depend on the relative SPDs of the characters. Teleporters, in my experience, usually get built with an above average SPD and DEX, often much above average. Call it the Nightcrawler effect if you want. So, for example, a 6 SPD Nightcrawler can elect to go last on 6, then teleport someone with a lower SPD away at the top of 8 when no one goes on 7(a 5 SPD character with a higher DEX, not very common, could get an action on 8). Unless, you want to allow a "dive for cover" maneuver against an attack roll that has already taken place which, doesn't fit into the game well. You don't normally get your DCV and then "dive for cover" if it hits. And like I said, in my experience, characters with Teleport as their main combat movement are usually toward the high end of the SPD and DEX charts, so this could actually be a common occurence. A 6 SPD character in a campaign where most characters are 4-5 SPD could pull this trick on their 6 and 10 phases consistently, arguably on 12, and also have a shot on 2,4, and 8 where another character would have to interpose, depending on the target's SPD. Better odds than trying to Haymaker.[/quote']

 

Well, in my experience, a character that spends more points on DEX and SPD will have an advantage over character with lower DEX and SPD no matter what they do. You can just as easily say a character with a SPD 6 shouldn't be allowed to Dodge, because against a SPD 3 character he can dodge all of his opponents attacks and still get to attack back, essentially for free. That doesn't hold much water and it still doesn't when applied to using Teleport.

 

In any case, what every happened to Roll with a Punch? The SFX is almost always moving away from the attack somewhat (hence the extra KB). So you touch me, easy. I Roll, and you're not touching me anymore. Neener neener! If I had been grabbed (which should have been easy given my much lower DEX), I couldn't have done that.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

I don't have much to say about the majority of your post Mike (post #31), except that the issues of enviornmental conditions are pretty fairly balanced among the Movement Power. It seems your argument has nothing to do with any kind of application of UAA or the act of teleporting others, but with Teleport in general. If you think that Teleport is underpriced, that naturally you're gonna think that teleporting involentary targets without an Advantage is underpriced. For you, maybe changing the cost of the base Teleport power would be just what you need. Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with Telport and it's cost fits in nicely and it's abilities are balanced with Running and Flight and Leaping and Gliding, etc.

2. to remember that' date=' especially where attacks and other things that could be potentially abusive are concerned, the most expensive build is the correct one. This is long standing HERO philosophy. So, if there is any doubt about whether Teleport should cost more or less, it costs more.[/quote']

 

This is the funniest metarule, and the one I can't help but laugh at. There are many ways of accomplishing a certain effect, and one will always be more expensive. That doesn't mean the more expensive one is the correct/legal build through nothing more than it's expensive cost. It has to be an accurate build for the SFX of the ability, and all aspects of it should be applicable or accounted for. I can easily buy an EB 6d6, BOECV, IPE (Sight & Hearing Groups) and pay 82 points. I could just as easily buy Ego Attack 6d6, Does Not Provide Mental Awareness for 48. According to Metarule 5, Ego Attack is by definition illegal and shouldn't even be included in the rules. But it is, so metarule 5 is a crock.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Something touched on but not pursued early in the thread was damage.

 

You can not (with UAA) teleport someone into a solid object. I would not allow anyone to do that if they were carrying a target UNLESS the attacker was willing to teleport them both into a solid object and take his or her chances.

 

Of course you can tp up and drop but flight is generally as or more effective at that kind of thing as you can do it multiple times to gain more height. In fact the only thing you can do (as far as I can see) with tping someone else you couldn't do with flight is get them into a locked box of some sort. Honours pretty much even on movement mode utility as far as I am concerned.

 

Personally I can see no good reason why you should need anything other than a grab to teleport an unwilling passenger, so long as you can not teleport them into something that you aren't going into yourself. I would only require UAA for teleporting a target without going along yourself, and, frankly, damn what the rules say.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

This is the funniest metarule, and the one I can't help but laugh at. There are many ways of accomplishing a certain effect, and one will always be more expensive. That doesn't mean the more expensive one is the correct/legal build through nothing more than it's expensive cost. It has to be an accurate build for the SFX of the ability, and all aspects of it should be applicable or accounted for. I can easily buy an EB 6d6, BOECV, IPE (Sight & Hearing Groups) and pay 82 points. I could just as easily buy Ego Attack 6d6, Does Not Provide Mental Awareness for 48. According to Metarule 5, Ego Attack is by definition illegal and shouldn't even be included in the rules. But it is, so metarule 5 is a crock.

 

 

That's metarule 6. Metarule 5 is that you shouldn't use one power to simulate what another power already does, which just might answer your objection

[RDU Neil]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

 

It seems to me that what is being said is: (A) You can Teleport mass above 100 kg, with this Adder. ( You can use this Adder on more mass than you can lift with your own STR. © You have the special permission that you can Teleport this 'extra' mass by merely touching it. (D) This special permission does not apply to involuntary persons (E) To Teleport involuntary person using this special permission you must also buy Usable As Attack

 

I don't see Teleporting an involuntary person without using the special permission as thereby requiring Usable As Attack.

 

Perhaps imposing the requirement that the involuntary person must not only be Grabbed, but also lifted bodily off the ground, might alleviate fears about game balance. Actually, that strikes me as a good idea as Teleporting an involuntary person should require more control over his body than merely pinning him --- IMO, of course.

 

 

I have to agree here. I think Steve's interpretation of the intent of the "touch" bit on teleport was a mis-interpretation. We'll probably never know, but that's my gut feeling. The original INTENT of "only has to touch" was so that a character didn't also HAVE to be a brick to take along multiple people, big object, etc. Essentially the Mass Multiple was kind of a "STR only for taking stuff along for the t-port."

 

But somehow, "only has to touch" was interpreted as "doesn't have to attack or be in control of an unwilling target" which wasn't the intent at all.

 

Instead of the UAA advantage, what was needed was simply an extra line of explanation text stating, "If the character wishes to try and teleport with an unwilling person, then a basic grab and breakaway action has to take place to establish that the "touch" is effective. This is similar to any other kind of movement, where a character is trying to grab and take an unwilling target along for the ride."

 

Essentially... Steve added to UAA to force an "attack roll" vs another target... when all that needed to be said was, "Trying to touch an unwilling target requires a successful grab roll (including the STR vs. casual STR to hold on)."

 

You might ask, "How do you justify a low STR t-porter taking a brick along, since a low STR flyer would have to lift and carry and maintain grip on the brick whose STR is much greater" I would again point out that the t-porter did, effectively buy more STR... just that it came in the form of the "Mass Multiplier" in terms of STR just for the purposes of taking 'em along for the ride.

 

Now... this way, a strong target has a good chance of foiling the Grab because even their casual STR can break the t-porter's initial grab (that free breakaway everyone gets) and the use of UAA negates this. With UAA, a Nightcrawler-esque character can leap atop a Juggernaught-esque character without worrying about any STR vs. STR and just port 'em away. You want that ability, fine... buy it with UAA... but it shouldn't be REQUIRED to carry unwilling targets any differently than any other movement power.

 

Just my .02... and again, been playing this way for decades and it works just fine for me. I'll stick with the basic 4th Ed interpretation on this one.

[beauxdeigh]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Now... this way' date=' a strong target has a good chance of foiling the Grab because even their casual STR can break the t-porter's initial grab (that free breakaway everyone gets) and the use of UAA negates this.[/quote']

Just as a note, the 'free breakaway' is an optional rule, and one that I don't play with. If a character has such a higher SPD that he can Grab and Teleport before the grabbed character gets an action, then it's because he paid the points for that ability. In my 10+ years of GMing that's never been a problem for me.

 

Now, before this brings on a whole other round of rules parsing and bickering, I would have absolutely no problem playing in a game where this rule is used. I just don't use it.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

Just as a note' date=' the 'free breakaway' is an [i']optional rule[/i], and one that I don't play with. If a character has such a higher SPD that he can Grab and Teleport before the grabbed character gets an action, then it's because he paid the points for that ability. In my 10+ years of GMing that's never been a problem for me.

 

Now, before this brings on a whole other round of rules parsing and bickering, I would have absolutely no problem playing in a game where this rule is used. I just don't use it.

 

Interesting... I had no idea it was optional. Been playing that way so long, I just assumed...

 

Did it become optional with 5th, or has it always been optional?

[Mike W]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

I don't have much to say about the majority of your post Mike (post #31), except that the issues of enviornmental conditions are pretty fairly balanced among the Movement Power. It seems your argument has nothing to do with any kind of application of UAA or the act of teleporting others, but with Teleport in general. If you think that Teleport is underpriced, that naturally you're gonna think that teleporting involentary targets without an Advantage is underpriced. For you, maybe changing the cost of the base Teleport power would be just what you need. Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with Telport and it's cost fits in nicely and it's abilities are balanced with Running and Flight and Leaping and Gliding, etc.

 

 

This is the funniest metarule, and the one I can't help but laugh at. There are many ways of accomplishing a certain effect, and one will always be more expensive. That doesn't mean the more expensive one is the correct/legal build through nothing more than it's expensive cost. It has to be an accurate build for the SFX of the ability, and all aspects of it should be applicable or accounted for. I can easily buy an EB 6d6, BOECV, IPE (Sight & Hearing Groups) and pay 82 points. I could just as easily buy Ego Attack 6d6, Does Not Provide Mental Awareness for 48. According to Metarule 5, Ego Attack is by definition illegal and shouldn't even be included in the rules. But it is, so metarule 5 is a crock.

 

Well, a good part of my argument, at least as it has tracked lately, has been that one reason UAA may have been required was as a balancing factor because Teleport was already a bit more powerful/versatile than other forms of movement, so unless you wanted it to be 3pts an inch, you had to give something up to balance it. Maybe, there were concerns that people wouldn't like or want to buy Teleport if it costs 3 pts per inch.

 

Still, part of my original argument had been that Teleport often involved doing more to another character's body than just picking it up and moving it. It often involved interdimensional gates, taking someone's body apart and putting it back together and various other special effects that usually required you to do things to a person's body that Power Defense or some kind of "active resistance" would normally make more difficult. Things that, were they built as attacks that did damage would normally end up NND, AVLD, or the like(e.g. - Teleportation sickness/disorientation). So, reasoning from special effect, you wouldn't normally be able to do these things as "standard attacks". They were special attacks. So the UAA became the way "through" the resistance. The thing that allowed you to do these kinds of attacks and that, in general, allowed you to take apart someone's body and put it back together somewhere else, or to send them, however briefly, to another dimension. The fact that Teleport is probably a bit more powerful than other forms of movement that cost a similar amount(such as running) helped justify the extra cost of UAA. The UAA helped balance out the other advantages Teleport has.

 

Now, how much of this is really what Steve was thinking, well, we'd have to ask him. But it's more or less the way I've always viewed it, and as a teacher, I always tell my students that they need to be thoroughly familiar with arguments on all sides, so I thought I'd take up the fight for the rule as it is written, partly just to play devil's advocate and partly to give people who may have been thinking of changing the rule some things to consider before they did. As always, GM's will modify things here or there. I don't remember ever playing a game that didn't have a few house "tweaks". At least, not for a very long time. But as a GM, I always pick apart any rules I change completely to make sure there aren't hidden balance issues or rationals behind rules that I might have missed, and any good GM I've played with has done the same. And since the original posts essentially were asking us to do just that, presumably because they as a GM wanted to make sure they weren't missing anything before changing the rule, like I said, I figured I'd take up the fight for the rule as is since no one else seemed willing to.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Teleportation, really that different?

 

On a different but related note, would you allow someone with a UAA Teleport to bring themselves along (when in contact, of course) if the Teleport has the Incrased Mass Adder? They would certainly be, "willing."