New advantage "Scour"

[AmadanNaBriona]

Back in the olden days, in the process of doing Ironmongery for our Star Hero campaign (OK.. it was actually our "space game"... Espionage in space), I wrote up an advantage to simulate an attack that damages armor at the same time it does damage to the target. At the time, my reasoning was simple... adding Destruction linked to an attack was cumbersome, especialy to try and tie the two damage rolls together. With the demise of Destruction and its replacement with long term drains, it became even stranger. So I set out with 5th ed to see if it balanced out the way I had it written, realized that Suppress might be my best choice for the construct, and thus...

 

Scour: +1/2 advantage

for attacks that use the body count on dice (KA's mainly, tho could be applied to other attacks at GM's discretion), similar to Penetrating.

As part of an attack, the "normal body" scored on the damage dice are removed from the targets DEF (rPD &rED). Thus a 3d6 Scour RKA hitting a target for a damage roll of 11 body (rolling 3, 6 and 2 on the dice) would remove 4 points of defence from the target.

 

Contrasted to a by the rules build as a compound power...

(well use 3d6 RKA as our sample, as the numbers work out cleanly)

3d6 RKA (45 AP)

(will have a range of "Normal body" from 0-6)

plus

3d6 Suppress (15 AP)

Advantages: (+1/2) vs 2 powers simultaneously (rPD & rED), (+1/2) 0 End Cost (+1/2) Persistant (effect is removed by healing natural armor as if it were body, or by repairs to artifical armor) total AP: 37.5

Limitations: (-0) Standard effect (removes 1 DEF per normal body rolled)

(-1/2) linked effect (-1/4) Costs Endurance, at activation only.

Total Cost: 21.4 points

 

point cost to add a +1/2 advantage to a 3d6 RKA: 22.5

 

I based the suppress on the cost of Armor (or PD/ED with Damage resistance) at 3 AP for 2 points of Armor, doubled to 6 points per 2 because its a defence, or in other words 3 points per 1 point of resistant defence, with the advantage allowing it to effect PD & ED simultaneously. The cumbersome 0 End Persistant with an activation END cost was needed to make the effect semi permenant while still adding to the END cost of the attack in the same way an advantage would and yet remaining a legal construct.

 

I have used this house rule advantage for many years in my campaigns without substantially effecting game balance, and it has come in very handy for simulating effects like acid attacks, particle beams that slice holes in armor and the like.

What do ya'll think?

 

EDIT: One thing I forgot to factor in to the compound power version is some form of "stopped by Hardened" limitation

[schir1964]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

I... like it!!!

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Dust Raven]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Pretty cool. Looks like it'll work out nicely too and stay balanced.

 

 

Personally, I don't like Modifiers effectively adding new Power to a Power though. Seems a bit weird. Like there should be a Damaging Advantage for Entangles so that the dice rolled will also do normal damage to the target in addition to entangling him before anything else of this sort. The only other issue is figuring out what happens when you want something like Scour, but it wipes out the target's INT instead of his defenses...

 

But for a specialized campaign setting it should work out just fine.

[Citizen Keen]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

I agree, in a specific context, I like it.

 

I would have thought it was unbalanced, but with the parallel power build using existing rules, I see it's fine.

[prestidigitator]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Think is, I don't think Persistant should be applied like you used it. If anything, it should be Continuous and Uncontrolled, which is going to be quite a bit more expensive.

 

I actually think the more straightforward way to do it would be with Drain, not Suppress. Then you buy the Fade Rate down until the effect is effectively indefinite. This is what Drain is for. This, too, is probably going to be a lot more expensive than your +1/2.

 

I rather agree with DR; if you want two effects, make a Linked Power. Done. Maybe your problem is more with things like Drain being temporary. Create a permenant effect? We can use a Fade Rate approach, do some hokey Uncontrolled with 0 End thing, or use Transform. Perhaps the rules for using Transform to add points to a character, but in reverse?

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

First off, let me explain the Metagame resons I cooked this up. Star Hero, more than many other genres, often leads towards a very high AP value for attacks in order to make them feel "in genre". This usually means that you're looking at rather high defences as well. At the time, I was trying for a campaign where combat "felt" like the combat scenes in Hammers Slammers. While the system already has advantages for bleeding damage past defences (Penetrating) and pucnhing through more effectively( AP), the only systems it has for attacks that can whittle through defences are either on the defence side (abalative) or by using a linked adjustment power. I wanted another power that was effected by, and could help cancel out, hardening, because the way things ended up going, there was a lot of hardneding running around to achieve the combat style I wanted. Scour was designed to help convince characters to keep their heads down, even if they were running around in powered armor or a tank. It increased the dramatic effect of sustained firefights a lot. Heavily armored targets might be able to soak up a few shots, but the more hits they managed to bounce, the more they begin to sweat. I always used hit locations as well, and only "scoured" the location(s) hit. gets that "one more hit on my left panel and I'm dead" Fear and loathing factor.

that being said....

I HATE using drain like this. Its clunky, cumbersome, works against Power Defence, which has yet to be defined in any sort of reasonable pseudo scientific way. Power Def has its place mechanics wise, but is the only defensive power that there is almost nothing you can point to in R/L and say... "Look...Power defence!" with the exception of a few things that work against a specific SFX (EMP Sheilded electronics and flame retardant insulators come to mind) I you go the drain route, you're looking at 20 ap for 1d6 of effect against a defence, which you then have to drop an obscene fade rate multiplier on to reasonably represent actually trashing the armor. And even then... We had one character who was a "man out of time" survey scout who was a few thousand years old thanks to coldsleep and relativity effects. So he could, if hit wioth said drain, conceviably hop back in his ship and go to sleep till his armor was fixed. Not that I'd allow such an assinine move, but you see where I'm going with this? On top of this issue... The attacker is paying obscene amounts of points for a (mostly) incendantal effect. So you pay for a every 100 years fade rate on the drain. Bob the character gets hit. now... we have two options. Let Bob buy new armor, in which case MOST of the massive number of points spent for the fade rate advantage are lost. Or you don't let Bob ever replace his armor... In which case the points are justified, but the character is hosed, because after bouncing a couple of hits off his armor, he's gonna have to watch over his shoulder for Ewoks with slingshots trying to kill him.

I went with the suppress model for just this reason. Its cumulative, which it needs to fit the design. I avoided Continous because Suppress is already constant, and making it continuous would allow it to keep depleting the armor. (most of my acid attacks using Scour were in fact built with Delayed effect to simulate this). I added persistent because even if you kill the guy who shot a hole in your armor, the hole doesn't go "poof" and disappear. 0 End Supresses require a defined way to remove the Suppress, which works (get new armor, or heal. Healing like it was Body does mean that healing technology/psi powers/magic and what not could help replace the lost power points, so there is some natural armor vs store bought balance)

Uncontrolled was a possiblity I looked at, to achive the exact same "how does it come back" effect, but as its required for a 0 END suppress I felt it to be redundant. Adding the appropriate Linked limitation to the RKA to make the two attacks counter dependant on one another would prbbaly get enough points to add the extra +1/2 for uncontrolled if it bugs you.

 

I suppose you could do something like this as a transform, but I''ve been trying REALLY hard not to default every semi permenant effect into a transform. It's a cop out.

[prestidigitator]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

First off' date=' let me explain the Metagame resons I cooked this up. Star Hero, more than many other genres, often leads towards a very high AP value for attacks in order to make them feel "in genre". This usually means that you're looking at rather high defences as well. At the time, I was trying for a campaign where combat "felt" like the combat scenes in Hammers Slammers. While the system already has advantages for bleeding damage past defences (Penetrating) and pucnhing through more effectively( AP), the only systems it has for attacks that can whittle through defences are either on the defence side (abalative) or by using a linked adjustment power. I wanted another power that was effected by, and could help cancel out, hardening, because the way things ended up going, there was a lot of hardneding running around to achieve the combat style I wanted. Scour was designed to help convince characters to keep their heads down, even if they were running around in powered armor or a tank. It increased the dramatic effect of sustained firefights a lot. Heavily armored targets might be able to soak up a few shots, but the more hits they managed to bounce, the more they begin to sweat. I always used hit locations as well, and only "scoured" the location(s) hit. gets that "one more hit on my left panel and I'm dead" Fear and loathing factor.[/quote']

Huh. Well, you could always say all external defenses in your campaign have Ablative on them. What's wrong with that? It sounds somewhat similar to the kind of thing you are trying to do anyway.

 

that being said....

I HATE using drain like this. Its clunky, cumbersome, works against Power Defence, which has yet to be defined in any sort of reasonable pseudo scientific way. Power Def has its place mechanics wise, but is the only defensive power that there is almost nothing you can point to in R/L and say... "Look...Power defence!" with the exception of a few things that work against a specific SFX (EMP Sheilded electronics and flame retardant insulators come to mind) I you go the drain route, you're looking at 20 ap for 1d6 of effect against a defence, which you then have to drop an obscene fade rate multiplier on to reasonably represent actually trashing the armor. And even then...

It seems pretty obscene to me to take away another character's defense, especially on a, "permenant," basis. Your problem with this seems to simply be that it is expensive, but that is what is ultimately balanced in the system; if you take away someone's defenses, they are...well...defenseless. Where once they could stand there and bounce bullets, now they must cower for fear of their life. BTW, Power Defense works against Suppress as well. Drain is cumulative, just like Suppress. If Drain is, "clunky and cumbersome," then Suppress is just as much so (I believe more so, because Suppress is very much intented to be temporary, while Drain is designed to last beyond when the attacker stops maintaining it).

 

We had one character who was a "man out of time" survey scout who was a few thousand years old thanks to coldsleep and relativity effects. So he could, if hit wioth said drain, conceviably hop back in his ship and go to sleep till his armor was fixed. Not that I'd allow such an assinine move, but you see where I'm going with this?

You won't allow it? Great! Problem solved, right? See where you're going with it? Not really. It sounds like you are running a game with a reasonably high amount of, "realism," so the setting is likely to have plenty happen to make the hundred year (or whatever) Fade Rate insignificant compared to other environmental issues.

 

On top of this issue... The attacker is paying obscene amounts of points for a (mostly) incendantal effect. So you pay for a every 100 years fade rate on the drain. Bob the character gets hit. now... we have two options. Let Bob buy new armor, in which case MOST of the massive number of points spent for the fade rate advantage are lost. Or you don't let Bob ever replace his armor... In which case the points are justified, but the character is hosed, because after bouncing a couple of hits off his armor, he's gonna have to watch over his shoulder for Ewoks with slingshots trying to kill him.

I went with the suppress model for just this reason. Its cumulative, which it needs to fit the design. I avoided Continous because Suppress is already constant, and making it continuous would allow it to keep depleting the armor. (most of my acid attacks using Scour were in fact built with Delayed effect to simulate this). I added persistent because even if you kill the guy who shot a hole in your armor, the hole doesn't go "poof" and disappear. 0 End Supresses require a defined way to remove the Suppress, which works (get new armor, or heal. Healing like it was Body does mean that healing technology/psi powers/magic and what not could help replace the lost power points, so there is some natural armor vs store bought balance)

Uncontrolled was a possiblity I looked at, to achive the exact same "how does it come back" effect, but as its required for a 0 END suppress I felt it to be redundant. Adding the appropriate Linked limitation to the RKA to make the two attacks counter dependant on one another would prbbaly get enough points to add the extra +1/2 for uncontrolled if it bugs you.

You can always allow Skills and/or other technology to work against a Drain, just like a Suppress. I believe Healing can reverse a Drain (it could in 4th anyway). I'm not saying you can't choose to use Suppress, but it just seems to me you are trying to make Suppress work exactly like a straightforward version of Drain, which goes against a Meta-Rule and is extra work besides. Even if you just make it a new Advantage, I'd base the value on the most straightforward and obvious way to do it using the existing system, which is without a doubt Drain.

 

BTW, if you use Uncontrolled instead of Persistant, it will come to the same value you got, and there is nothing to say an Uncontrolled Power won't last past its originator's death (this is in fact left explicitly up to the GM, I believe).

 

I suppose you could do something like this as a transform, but I''ve been trying REALLY hard not to default every semi permenant effect into a transform. It's a cop out.

I'm afraid I just don't understand that one. (Semi-)Permenant effects are exactly what Transform was designed for. You could probably even get away with the Transform changing the armor to something useless, and have partial effect along the way reduce the armor's actual value. Not that I would necessarily use Transform myself. I'd consider both Transform and Drain valid approaches, and have to think a bit to really choose myself.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Huh. Well' date=' you could always say all external defenses in your campaign have Ablative on them. What's wrong with that? It sounds somewhat similar to the kind of thing you are trying to do anyway.[/quote']

well... the idea was that all defences AREN'T ablative. Only certain effects would inflict armor damage.

 

It seems pretty obscene to me to take away another character's defense, especially on a, "permenant," basis. Your problem with this seems to simply be that it is expensive, but that is what is ultimately balanced in the system; if you take away someone's defenses, they are...well...defenseless. Where once they could stand there and bounce bullets, now they must cower for fear of their life. BTW, Power Defense works against Suppress as well. Drain is cumulative, just like Suppress. If Drain is, "clunky and cumbersome," then Suppress is just as much so (I believe more so, because Suppress is very much intented to be temporary, while Drain is designed to last beyond when the attacker stops maintaining it).

You can always allow Skills and/or other technology to work against a Drain, just like a Suppress. I believe Healing can reverse a Drain (it could in 4th anyway). I'm not saying you can't choose to use Suppress, but it just seems to me you are trying to make Suppress work exactly like a straightforward version of Drain, which goes against a Meta-Rule and is extra work besides. Even if you just make it a new Advantage, I'd base the value on the most straightforward and obvious way to do it using the existing system, which is without a doubt Drain.

Part of the reason for the custom advantage was to divorce the effect from Power Defence and tie it to hardening instead. I handwaved this as approximately a net +0.

The reasoning behind using suppress was that the conditions for removing the damage aren't time based, but rather condition based. Supresses go completely away. Drains heal. And I still have issues with drain fade rates for permentant effects. like you said... they're nasty. But its a kind of nasty that, like I said, leaves the GM on the horns of a dilemma... Do I let the expensive armor destroying power hose my PC and be worth its hideous cost, or do I let my PC replace his defences between scens or sessions... thus invalidating the massive cost of the drain.

BTW, if you use Uncontrolled instead of Persistant, it will come to the same value you got, and there is nothing to say an Uncontrolled Power won't last past its originator's death (this is in fact left explicitly up to the GM, I believe).

Good point and a great catch. If I used the actual construct rather than just building it to compare effect to the advantage I'd definitely change it

 

I'm afraid I just don't understand that one. (Semi-)Permenant effects are exactly what Transform was designed for. You could probably even get away with the Transform changing the armor to something useless, and have partial effect along the way reduce the armor's actual value. Not that I would necessarily use Transform myself. I'd consider both Transform and Drain valid approaches, and have to think a bit to really choose myself.

To clarify my earlier statement.

I really like transforms. A lot. its actually really WAY to easy to do almost anything not covered elsewhere with transforms. But as a way of doing a cost comparison to another effect to see if my custom advatage was approximately costed right, it wouldn't work.

the problem with the transform approach is that its a bit sketchy. I thought about a transform that gives the armor the Ablative limit, but in play it is clunky, again. The model I was working with, by following the Penetrating mechanism, works rather elegantly and doesn't cause much of an in play headache

 

EDIT: BTW... thanks for the feedback Prestidigitator

[Dust Raven]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

I was fiddling with the numbers of this idea and came to some interesting results. By my best estimation, this should be a +1 1/2 Advantage, not a +1/2. For one, it's effects are far more powerful than a simple +1/2 would normally give it. Think about it. If given the choice between Armor Piercing and Scour, which would you take? For a +1/2, Scour each and every time. Not only will it reduce the target's DEF for my next hit, it reduces it for everybody's next hit as well, and has a cumulative effect. Wondering about this, I played with the numbers of using Suppress and other Powers to achieve an identical effect as described. This is what I came up with.

 

Suppress is undoubtedly the wrong mechanic to use, no matter what you do with it. Persistant or Uncontrolled, it's a contuing power with a limited range (that is, the range isn't infinate). Should the target get far enough away, all his armor would come back. Doesn't sound like the right effect.

 

Drain works. It's effects last until the points return, and the return rate can be dropped to however low you want it. The trick is overcoming that Power Defense issue, which you'd have with Suppress anyway. That's what NND is for. I'm not sure about the original concept of Scour, but it seems in line with things like Armor Piercing and Penetrating, so I figure if the target's Armor is Hardened, Scour shouldn't have any effect, so there's the NND. Power Defense need not apply.

 

The final work up would look like this, for a 3d6 effect:

 

Scour: Drain Armor 3d6 (standard effect: 9 points), Reduced Endurance (1/2 END; +1/4), NND (Hardened Advantage on Armor; +1/2), Ranged (+1/2), Delayed Return Rate (points return at the rate of 5 per Month; +2); Points Return Automatically If Armor Is Repaired/Replaced (-1/2), Linked (RKA; -1/4) Real Cost 73.

 

A +1 1/2 Advantage would actually increase the cost of an RKA 3d6 by 67 points, but I feel this is close enough. I picked a rate of 5/month because it seemed that any character would end up getting his armor fixed or replaced by that point anyway, so it's effectively "forever" as far as the game is concerned.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

I was fiddling with the numbers of this idea and came to some interesting results. By my best estimation' date=' this should be a +1 1/2 Advantage, not a +1/2. For one, it's effects are far more powerful than a simple +1/2 would normally give it. Think about it. If given the choice between Armor Piercing and Scour, which would you take? For a +1/2, Scour each and every time. Not only will it reduce the target's DEF for my next hit, it reduces it for [i']everybody's[/i] next hit as well, and has a cumulative effect. Wondering about this, I played with the numbers of using Suppress and other Powers to achieve an identical effect as described. This is what I came up with.

 

Suppress is undoubtedly the wrong mechanic to use, no matter what you do with it. Persistant or Uncontrolled, it's a contuing power with a limited range (that is, the range isn't infinate). Should the target get far enough away, all his armor would come back. Doesn't sound like the right effect.

 

Drain works. It's effects last until the points return, and the return rate can be dropped to however low you want it. The trick is overcoming that Power Defense issue, which you'd have with Suppress anyway. That's what NND is for. I'm not sure about the original concept of Scour, but it seems in line with things like Armor Piercing and Penetrating, so I figure if the target's Armor is Hardened, Scour shouldn't have any effect, so there's the NND. Power Defense need not apply.

 

The final work up would look like this, for a 3d6 effect:

 

Scour: Drain Armor 3d6 (standard effect: 9 points), Reduced Endurance (1/2 END; +1/4), NND (Hardened Advantage on Armor; +1/2), Ranged (+1/2), Delayed Return Rate (points return at the rate of 5 per Month; +2); Points Return Automatically If Armor Is Repaired/Replaced (-1/2), Linked (RKA; -1/4) Real Cost 73.

 

A +1 1/2 Advantage would actually increase the cost of an RKA 3d6 by 67 points, but I feel this is close enough. I picked a rate of 5/month because it seemed that any character would end up getting his armor fixed or replaced by that point anyway, so it's effectively "forever" as far as the game is concerned.

 

You've got some good points here.

One possible quibble is that the final toatal cost with this write up SHOULD also include the point break for putting the -1/2 Linked limitation on the RKA as well, because if its supposed to model an advantage neither can be used without the other. That drops 15 points off the total cost, which wacks things a bit out of line just a touch.

Another ione, whichh I freely admit I may be spacing out on, is that the effect doesn't seem to be tied to or limited by the damage on the RKA.

 

I think I'm convinced that it needs to be a larger Advantage, but I'm still not convinced that the effect is worth a +1 1/2 in practical terms... the same as an attack with NND (common defence) Does Body, which seems to me to be better than this ability. I could see it as a +1 Advantage... It seems in line with Does Body, Continuous, or Useable as Attack in utility.

[Dust Raven]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

You've got some good points here.

One possible quibble is that the final toatal cost with this write up SHOULD also include the point break for putting the -1/2 Linked limitation on the RKA as well, because if its supposed to model an advantage neither can be used without the other. That drops 15 points off the total cost, which wacks things a bit out of line just a touch.

Another ione, whichh I freely admit I may be spacing out on, is that the effect doesn't seem to be tied to or limited by the damage on the RKA.

True, but being forced to use such an Advantage doesn't seem very limiting to me. In any case, the value of that bonus would depend highly on other Modifiers on the RKA. It could be more, it could be less.

 

I think I'm convinced that it needs to be a larger Advantage, but I'm still not convinced that the effect is worth a +1 1/2 in practical terms... the same as an attack with NND (common defence) Does Body, which seems to me to be better than this ability. I could see it as a +1 Advantage... It seems in line with Does Body, Continuous, or Useable as Attack in utility.

 

I think it's right up there with AVLD. It is extremely effective. It allows even a small attack to eventually bore through any level of defense while allowing other attacks without this Advantage to take advantage of it's effects. This second part no other Advantage does.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

OK...so heres another, slightly more "game design philsophy" and less crunchy mechanics....

 

do you think that, if it was used the way I did in our campaign

(i.e. reducing the armor only on the specific location hit), it should be tired the same way 5th does NND, Autofire and the like...

Perhaps +1 1/2 normally, but, say +3/4 if applied only to a specific location?

(As this reduces the EWWWWWW factor by a LOT)

[Gary]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Speaking of Autofire, be very careful. An Autofire Scour attack could reduce the target's defenses by a ton in one phase.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Speaking of Autofire' date=' be [b']very[/b] careful. An Autofire Scour attack could reduce the target's defenses by a ton in one phase.

 

very very true. Remember folks... while point costs weren't all that important because it was a heroic level game, I used this advantage in a campaign that lasted some 8 years. there were only a few semi common weapon systems that used Scour (and many of them were AP as well) and they always caused a cartain amount of PC "Whoa... DUCK!" moments.

Particle Beams, for instance, had a very disctinct bright green signature that caused anyone with a smidgen of combat experience to hit cover and get real serious in a big hurry.

[prestidigitator]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

OK...so heres another, slightly more "game design philsophy" and less crunchy mechanics....

 

do you think that, if it was used the way I did in our campaign

(i.e. reducing the armor only on the specific location hit), it should be tired the same way 5th does NND, Autofire and the like...

Perhaps +1 1/2 normally, but, say +3/4 if applied only to a specific location?

(As this reduces the EWWWWWW factor by a LOT)

That's interesting. I wouldn't drop it by that much, though. If you roll randomly for hit location, it is likely you will be hitting the same spot (body) quite often. If the attacker is targetting, they are likely to aim for the same spot to take advantage. If a single location is affected, I'd drop it by 1/4 to 1/2 at most.

[prestidigitator]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

very very true. Remember folks... while point costs weren't all that important because it was a heroic level game, I used this advantage in a campaign that lasted some 8 years. there were only a few semi common weapon systems that used Scour (and many of them were AP as well) and they always caused a cartain amount of PC "Whoa... DUCK!" moments.

Particle Beams, for instance, had a very disctinct bright green signature that caused anyone with a smidgen of combat experience to hit cover and get real serious in a big hurry.

Well shoot! Just from the description it sounds like a +1 1/2.

 

Seriously, you have a very devastating effect on your hands. I wouldn't underestimate the point value.

[Dust Raven]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

OK...so heres another, slightly more "game design philsophy" and less crunchy mechanics....

 

do you think that, if it was used the way I did in our campaign

(i.e. reducing the armor only on the specific location hit), it should be tired the same way 5th does NND, Autofire and the like...

Perhaps +1 1/2 normally, but, say +3/4 if applied only to a specific location?

(As this reduces the EWWWWWW factor by a LOT)

 

I'm not up on Sectional Defenses in 5th Edition, but this doesn't sound like too much of a limiting factor. Such campaigns tend to allow targeting, and those OCV penalties aren't that hard to over come, and some aren't even all that bad (especially if you just take "body shots" or "high shots").

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Well shoot! Just from the description it sounds like a +1 1/2.

 

Seriously, you have a very devastating effect on your hands. I wouldn't underestimate the point value.

 

LMAO

Ok, ok... you may have a vaild point there.

And they weren't anywhere near the nastiest weapons in the game

 

IIRC that honor went to an illegal black ops assaination weapon that did a 5d6 NND does body, Invisible power effects variable time delay RKA monster of a hideaway weapon. possession was a capital offence. It was intended as a plot device toy. One player was assigned one for a mission, and used it with the reverence, stealth, and caution it deserved. Another player lifted it off him and proceeded to wreak mayhem with it. Guess which one got arrested and executed by firing squad?

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

LMAO

Ok, ok... you may have a vaild point there.

And they weren't anywhere near the nastiest weapons in the game

 

IIRC that honor went to an illegal black ops assaination weapon that did a 5d6 NND does body, Invisible power effects variable time delay RKA monster of a hideaway weapon. possession was a capital offence. It was intended as a plot device toy. One player was assigned one for a mission, and used it with the reverence, stealth, and caution it deserved. Another player lifted it off him and proceeded to wreak mayhem with it. Guess which one got arrested and executed by firing squad?

 

Since there was a GM running the game, I'm guessing the havoc-wreaker bought the bullet. In real life, though, my money would be on the careful one. After all the havoc, the berserker would return it to the careful guy, and THEN the cops would show up.

 

That's a kewl weapon, by the way.

[Trebuchet]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

I think I'm convinced that it needs to be a larger Advantage' date=' but I'm still not convinced that the effect is worth a +1 1/2 in practical terms... the same as an attack with NND (common defence) Does Body, which seems to me to be better than this ability. I could see it as a +1 Advantage... It seems in line with Does Body, Continuous, or Useable as Attack in utility.[/quote']An interesting idea, but I've got a few questions.

 

1) What is the defense against this attack? Hardened? Power Defense? It is a metarule that all attacks must have a defense, and the defense is always much cheaper than the attack.

 

2) Isn't it a rule that attacks versus defenses cost double? Or has that been dropped for 5e?

 

3) Since the damage to the target's defenses help all of his opponents rather than just the shooter, I would think it reasonable to include "Usable by Others" when calculating comparable costs.

 

I think Dust Raven's suggestion of +1½ Advantage is a minimum for this Advantage; and +2 would not be out of line. I think this should be a tremendously expensive Advantage because it's a tremendously effective effect, since it's essentially Transforming a target's defenses into increasingly less effective defenses for anyone shooting at that target.

 

And rather than Scour, I would call this advantage Degrade.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Seems to me that weapons of this nature in any game would result in Hardened becoming a very prized advantage for armor. Hey, should I have +10/10 Armor for 30 points, or +8/+8 Hardened armor that won't get Scoured away?

 

Actually, I'd probably go with +10/+10 and a ReflectoShield to send these nasty attacks back against their originator, given the choice

 

Of course, access to either option (as well as the advantage itself) depends on the game setting. I've never been a bog fan of "these big nasty weapons are available to the enemy but if your characters use them "indiscriminately", it's off to prison or worse" settings.

[Dust Raven]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Seems to me that weapons of this nature in any game would result in Hardened becoming a very prized advantage for armor. Hey' date=' should I have +10/10 Armor for 30 points, or +8/+8 Hardened armor that won't get Scoured away?[/quote']

 

By the general description of the Advantage, and the way it's been written up in example powers, it only affects the Armor Power. So things like normal defenses and a FF wouldn't be affected, and so those powers might be more desired overall. Given the genre though, it's unlikely anyone will have enough natural ED, let along Damage Resistance, and FF technology might not exist or be much more expensive (not in points, but in cash).

[Fox1]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

Off hand I think this is an answer to the question no one ever asked. Except those who lost control of what is and is not allowed in their game in the first place.

 

For a HERO design philosophy it comes across even worse. If you want to do an attack with two very different affects- linked and combo powers are the means to do it- not a new advantage that breaks new ground.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

My intent was to try and comparison price it so that it affected resistant persistant defence... essentially Armor and PD/ED with damage reistance. This is actually another small beef I have with adjustment powers... Defence powers stack seamlessly, but making a single adjustment power that affects that stack of defences requires getting crafty and tricksty... do you use the +1/4 effects one power of a group advantage and handwave that once you'e penetrated a defenceit affects the next one in line? or do you drop a +2 advantage to affect all defence powers then limit the heck out of it so it effects them sequentially instead of all at once?

In any case, in practice my intent wa that it would affect all resistant defences, but non persistant ones would simply be restored with another application of the power... until the defenders next phase IOW. So force feilds would be a lot better for resisting these kinds of attacks.

Which is why, as Dust Raven guessed, Forcefeilds were an uncommon defence... expensive and bulky backpack sized generators were the smallest models around and were still considered rare. Sheilds require a fairly massive power supply, and are thus usually found only in emplaced positions, large vehicles and the like.

And yes, Hardened defences were very valuable in this campaign. They were the hallmark of millitary grade armor. Civilian body armor could be quite effective (upwards of 15 def) but virtually every millitary weapon has some form of AP, Penetrating, Scour, Peircing, or a combonation of the above. Civilian armor gets cut up like butter.

 

I used a variety of other custom modifiers as well... many, like AP capped, were taken from the original Golden Age of Champions. Others, like 1/4 AP (+1/4 advantage, removes 1/4 of targets protection), 3/4 AP (+1 advantage, removes 3/4 of a targets protection), and Burstfire (+1/2 advantage to autofire, makes hit interval 1 hit per point attack is made by while doubling number of 'extra" shots required to spread attacks) were added to increase granularity and make the weapons charts interesting. No one weapon every really stood out as being the end all superweapon. The common troopers shoulder arm was very similar to the M41-A Pulse Rifle from Aliens... caseless select fire high capacity bullpup rifle firing explosive Armor Peircing shells. There were only a very few weapons that were truely restriced in use, like the Whisper (above mentioned Black Ops weapon... fires a hypervelocity mircopellet of a tailored neurotoxin thats been contained in a tough polymer shell that decays according to a preprogrammed half life. Dial in your time delay, point it, press a button. unless the target is sheilded or it hits double hardened armor, the pellet slips in with about as much damage as a mosquito bite... till the polymer decays and the target drops over dead.), and those weapons were all exceptionally rare. I actually ended up creating a scenario just so a player would finally have a chance to use one. Until then, it had existed as nothing more than a set of stats, a vague threat, and something to wistfully ask smugglers about only to be laughed at.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New advantage "Scour"

 

By the general description of the Advantage' date=' and the way it's been written up in example powers, it only affects the Armor Power. So things like normal defenses and a FF wouldn't be affected, and so those powers might be more desired overall. Given the genre though, it's unlikely anyone will have enough natural ED, let along Damage Resistance, and FF technology might not exist or be much more expensive (not in points, but in cash).[/quote']

 

It's "given the genre" that bothers me. Without knowing what will be available, or won't be, the value of the advantage is hard to assess. If hardened armor is virtually unheard of, then even "NND - Hardened" wouldn't be legitimate, since it's not common.

 

That means I fall back on "system as a whole" to assess whether a value is reasonable, and what impact it will have on a game. To me, "Scour" is a lot more efective than "Armor Piercing" and therefore should be blocked by the same thing.

 

AP halves defenses only once (in effect, it suppresses half the target's defenses, NND vs. hardened defenses, for one attack). Scour reduces defenses long-term, applicable to all attackers, which seems far more effective. Getting the same effect some other way (long-term NND Drain of 1 rPD per d6 of EB) would be much more expensive than the 1/2 advantage proposed. 2.5 points for an NND drain of 1 PD or 1 ED seems very cheap.