Mental Powers

[Dust Raven]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I'm referring to the system having been freeer (whether that was good or bad of course being the matter of debate, but at least those of us who've been around have seen it the other way). Not referring to a free perspective in open-mindedness.

 

I mentioned earlier that it does, at the least in responses, as to the fact that GMs can change it. You don't have to agree with my point, of course, but I have repeatedly pointed out the "why", that being the whole issue that the system now very strongly implies that CoM is a necessary balancing technique and properly simulation of some sort of critical mass of genra. Otherwise why cost it out and why have it? And if it were a valid balancing and were representative of some critical mass or core fictional work, that's fine, it'd be great, but all that just ain't so. Is it snazzy? Is it pretty? In some ways, yes. But that's no reason to be a rule nor do such criteria make it advantageous over the preexisting approach (again, aside from Mechanical which had that whole "no EGO' thing).

 

It provides a global rule that allows for any number of possible settings that can be simulated without using an overabundance of Power Modifiers and GM fiat. The lack of such a rule forces a GM to make use of Power Modifiers and GM fiat. Given the choice between having and not having such a rule, I'd choose to have it, regardless of how I ended up using it.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

It provides a global rule that allows for any number of possible settings that can be simulated without using an overabundance of Power Modifiers and GM fiat. The lack of such a rule forces a GM to make use of Power Modifiers and GM fiat. Given the choice between having and not having such a rule' date=' I'd choose to have it, regardless of how I ended up using it.[/quote']

I think it would have potential if it were explored in other fashions, divorcing it from the strict bio-genetic basis it has taken on.

 

However, "GM fiat' is either involved to change it, or one uses the default. The default doesn't at all "allow for any number of possible settings" and so on. At least it doesnt apply to a single setting I've GMed, it might apply to a setting I've played in, I'm not sure at the moment.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

So should we have default magic classes in the main book? Why not, by extension what is the difference?

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I want to intrude on this thread again.

 

Seems our view of classes of minds got another wrinkle today.

 

Steve just ruled in the Questions Forum that Automatons are immune to mental powers unless they take a physical limitation stating that certain mental powers effect them. This immunity overrides the class of mind that by SFX a given Automaton would be subject to.

 

Hawksmoor

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

It's not being rammed down your throat any more than "EB cost 5 points per d6" is. You just don't like it. Maybe leaves a bad taste in your mouth or it just not your cup of tea. That doesn't mean it's bad and shouldn't be a standard rule.

 

EB has to have a cost. The system needs to set one, or the system is not playable. We can then debate as to what the "standard cost" should be, but I don't think anyone would argue that popwers, stats, etc. ought not to have a standardized cost.

 

The mechanics of mental powers, however, can be defined quite adequately without use of Classes of Mind. It is not an essential rule without which the system is disfunctional. It should be an option for framing the manner in which mental powers work.

 

Would you support a rule which provided that Energy Blasts, by default, affect one "Class of Body", with the basic "Classes of body" being "Flesh and Bone", "Mineral", "Amorphous" and "Liquid/Gaseous", and you pay +10 points as an adder to add another "Class of Body" your energy blast affects?

 

It may be a very good structure for a gamne setting where this is a key differentiating factor. It neither needs to be nor should be in the core rules.

 

This again. It's not about SFX. It's about applicability. It lets you know what you can and can't use the Power on. You can't shoot the air with your EB' date=' or can you attack an idea with an EB. You can't use a STUN Drain on a brick wall. You can't use a Dispel Flight on a target without flight. And you can't use Telepathy versus Human Minds against a frog with an Animal Mind. Applicability, not SFX.[/quote']

 

With the exception of the mental attack, each of your example powers fail because of a mechanical difference between a human and the target. Air and ideas lack STUN and BOD (actually, why can't I "shoot the air" with my fire blast and remove BOD of breathable air in an enclosed envirionment? Oxygen is consumed by fire.). Brick walls have no Stun. They are not immune to Drains by defualt - BOID drain or PD (DEF?) Drain would target a characteristic the wall has, so should logically work. An EB will do BOD, but not STUN, since walls have BOD, but not STUN. Targets without flight, presumably, have no flight. We need no special rule to tell us "the attack is ineffective if it targets a stat or ability the target does not have". We need a special rule to tell us "telepathy can affect humans or animals, but not both", because both humans and animals have an Ego score, and there is absolutely nothing, mechanicaly, to prevent the power form working on both equally effectively in the absence of this special rule.

 

To SFX, we clearly disagree on whether this is SFX driven. In my view, Classes of M

 

(a) The attacker mentally rearranges the target's mind to change his will and desires. CoM works fine here.

 

( The attacker alters neuron flow so the target lacks any free will and will take whatever action is suggested to him by the attacker. Anyone with neurons should be affected (humans, animals, many aliens, no mechanical minds or AI's).

 

© The attacker modifies electrical impulses to force the target's body to comply with hiis wishes (should work on mechanical, human and animals, plus aliens whose biology uses electrical impulses to send messages).

 

(d) The attacker's mind magically superimposes itself over the target's mind and spirit/soul, superseding its ability to instruct the body to take actions. (Deadman, Jericho) Who this affects depends on campaign backdrop - do animals have souls? Do aliens? But if Dr. Diaboliocal's soul is absent from his body (it's been sold to the devil), he should be unaffected. And if "even androids have souls", then androids should be affected.

 

(e) Illusions? The attacker injects the target with a psychedelic drug. This should affect anything (human, animal, some aliens) with a body chemistry the drug will affect.

 

Meanwhile, an Ego Transfer is effective at stealing the mental strength of any target lacking power defense, even if their minds are completely incompatible with the attacker's.

 

Possibly' date=' but Classes of Mind is not an optional rule, just a maleable one, like sense groups. Even more maleable actually. Do you HeroDesigner? Try to type in your own sense groups for a Sense or Sense-Affecting Power (you can't). Now try to type in your own class of mind for a Mental Power (you can). Interesting, isn't it?[/quote']

 

Not really. I don't use Hero Designer, and the absence of flexibility for sense groups does not surprise me. Can it show two sense groups at once (the book provides for some senses to belong to two groups at once). My wife likes Hero Designer, and we often need to do a workaround on something we want in place that it can't do adequately.

 

As for the definition of terms' date=' classes of mind, tight groups and whatnot are all the same. It's up to the GM what classifies as a certian class of mind, just as it is what classifies as a tight group. Suggestions are made, of course, as there are for a number of things, and that number of things are freely admited to be necessarily different depending upon any given campaign's setting and GM preferences.[/quote']

 

Agein, we differ on how the words are read. I perceive the four classes provided as setting a default. They are not phrased as "one possible structure might be", or offset with other examples. They are set as the basic classes of minds. Intentional or not, that sounds like defaults to me.

 

It's not a "one system way" in any sense of the term. Why do you see it as such? Your thinking and comprehension is not that limited. I'm convinced you just don't like it and now stubbornly refuse to look at it any other way.

 

I've asked you to give me a reason why removing it from the rules would be an improvement, and why adding it was not. All you've told me is colored in personal bias, incorrect information and irrelevant data.

 

"Each mental power affects one class of minds as a default". Does that statement make sense if there is only one class of minds? "Another class can be added for a +10 adder". Does that sound to you like the default is a single class of minds? I can accuse you of liking the concept and thus stubbornly refusing to look at any other possibility as being the approoriate default.

 

How would the game SUFFER if the rules provided, as a default, that mental powers affect any target with an Ego score, and provided the cuirrent Classes of Mind rules as an optional rule?

 

But' date=' yes. the classes of mind rule does impose that viewpoint, and also allows for there to be any number of classes, or as few as one. It's not a change in the rules to do this, but merely a use of them.[/quote']

 

You've answered your own question. My objection is to this single viewpoint being imposed for the game as a whole. The Champs U carries a view, IIRC, that all superpowers ultimately derive from Magic. I do not subscriube to this view in my games. I do not feel it would be appropriate for that rule to be a core rule of the Hero system. I have no problem with its presentation as a setting rule.

 

The classes of mind construction is (or should be) a nuse of the rules, and not a rule/rules set unto itself. There was no need or benefit to making this "a rule", rather than a"n application of the rules to create a framework for the existence of mental powers"

 

One more time' date=' because no mater how many times I say this, you either haven't noticed it or have simply not responded to it: The rules for class of mind allow for how I, personally, believe Mental Powers should be applied, and also how you, personally, believe Mental Powers should be applied. Doing it either way is not a change in the rules, just a correct application of them. If it's stricken from the rules, or made an optional rule, it requires a player or GM to purchase a second book (possibly full of rules of no use to him) just to have that option that takes up less then a column of space to write out.[/quote']

 

By placing classes of mind as a core rule, the standard is set that mental powers are not universal by default. Presenting it as an optional rule would not prevent anyone from adopting that approach.

 

It could be presented as an option in the core rules, or as an option in another book. I favour the latter. Yes, this means there are options outside the core rules. How are Classes of Mind more essential to the game system than the optional rules for vehicles in TUV, the rules for ranged martial arts in UMA, or the rules for building your own martial arts maneuvers in UMA? Should the "spell" limitation from Fantasy Hero be in the core rules? How about the discussion on "invulnerability" from that same book? Should 5e2r be an encyclopedia covering all rules, standard and optional, presented anywhere in the Hero library? I don't see Classes of Mind as more seminal to the toolbox than any pf the above iutems. If anything, I would suggest the martial arts construction rules are far more relevant to a core rules system.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Steve just ruled in the Questions Forum that Automatons are immune to mental powers unless they take a physical limitation stating that certain mental powers effect them. This immunity overrides the class of mind that by SFX a given Automaton would be subject to.

 

I saw that, and like you thought of this thread. This effectively adds another class of minds (automaton) which is not permitted a 10 point adder to affect. DOes consistency with the "classes of mind" rules require automatons be prohibited from mental powers as well? If you can't have mental powers which affect them, can they change their own default to have mental powers that affect non-automatons? Clearly, they can't have mental powers that do affect automatons.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I want to intrude on this thread again.

 

Seems our view of classes of minds got another wrinkle today.

 

Steve just ruled in the Questions Forum that Automatons are immune to mental powers unless they take a physical limitation stating that certain mental powers effect them. This immunity overrides the class of mind that by SFX a given Automaton would be subject to.

 

Hawksmoor

Uh...................................

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Uh...................................

 

It makes sense in its own way.

 

But I do have to wonder for what case the INT = EGO rule is for. I can't see an application for it now.

[tesuji]

Re: Mental Powers

 

FWIW, for years i know i and others round here viewed "alien mind" for non-human-like aliens (or "animal mind" for man-animal hybrids or even "machine minded" for heavily machined up cyborgs) as nothing more than justification for or the sfx flavor for buying mental defense for the character.

 

This had the added flavor issue of being able to buy a little mental d for the mostly human cyborg and a ton of it for the "almost no meat left" cyborg wuth the "yeah you have a firm grip on the brain, but the brain really doesn't have a lot of decision making clout in there anymore."

 

It never once occured to us that it would have been better to have these sorts of things be handled by doing both of the following:

1: having them be a free immunity to a whole suite of powers

2. basically disallowing them for PC use due to the realization that free immunities are out of whack.

 

Of course, we were silly folk back then.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

It never once occured to us that it would have been better to have these sorts of things be handled by doing both of the following:

 

It really doesn't change anything you know.

 

Just to compare your game with mine (I use the classes as listed early in the thread- all PCs must be in the same class) for example.

 

A PC cyborg could still buy Mental Defense to represent a nearly missing mind assuming I thought that was a good justification.

 

My NPCs cost more points if they were done in your game, but it makes no difference in actual play because NPCs cost whatever they need to cost.

 

90% of this thread is whining about differences which make no difference.

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Fox1 Points are the core of the HERO system.

 

That is why there are little point costs behind all those constructs.

 

Given the benefit and drawbacks of the Classes of Mind system a point cost should be assigned somewhere.

 

To suggest otherwise is silly.

 

Hawksmoor

[schir1964]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I'd like to thank everyone for thier posts in this thread. I hadn't made a final decision on whether the Class of Minds rules was beneficial to the rules as it is presented or not.

 

The argument has boiled down to one thing:

 

Would the rules be better served if the Classes of Mind rule were removed as presented and redone to be an optional rule for the GM? (With the default being that Mental Powers affect everyone equally, based on whether they have an EGO stat or not.)

 

Based on the arguments presented here and taking into account the toolkit nature that the system is trying to achieve, I've been convinced that the Class of Minds should be removed and presented as an optional rule for the GM.

 

Thank you all for helping to improve my game. I'm glad you took an interest. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Based on the arguments presented here and taking into account the toolkit nature that the system is trying to achieve, I've been convinced that the Class of Minds should be removed and presented as an optional rule for the GM.

 

Thank you all for helping to improve my game. I'm glad you took an interest. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Glad we could help.

 

Hawksmoor

-Let's see if I am actually on Fox1's Ignore shall we?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

It makes sense in its own way.

 

But I do have to wonder for what case the INT = EGO rule is for. I can't see an application for it now.

 

I believe for things like computers which lack Ego but have INT.

 

However, it does beg the question why putting the computer on top of a robot body makes it immune, doesn't it? Of course, that begs the question whether cyberkinesis (which would logically affect both robot and computer) would also affect, say, a zombie. And, if not, how one would craft a mental power to affect the zombie? Necromancy, in Fantasy, of course. What if he's a zombie due to chemical stimulants applied to a corpse - no machines and no magic.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Of course' date=' we were silly folk back then.[/quote']

 

Count me in as one of the silly folk, then.

 

I can see classes of mind as an optional rule for a setting where the GM has put some effort into balancing classes of mind, one against the other, so that a PC belonging to any class has equal advantages/disadvantages.

 

I can also see it where the tone of the game demands it (perhaps a horror game where telepathic powers will work on humans, but not monsters).

 

But I see the standard of "mental powers affect everyone equally - if your character (PC or NPC) should be an exception, pay the points for this exceptional benefit" as being the most appropriate default.

 

[blast - you must spread rep around...]

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

The argument has boiled down to one thing:

 

Would the rules be better served if the Classes of Mind rule were removed as presented and redone to be an optional rule for the GM? (With the default being that Mental Powers affect everyone equally, based on whether they have an EGO stat or not.)

 

A very neat and concise summation of what the question really boils down to. Rep'd

[tesuji]

Re: Mental Powers

 

My NPCs cost more points if they were done in your game, but it makes no difference in actual play because NPCs cost whatever they need to cost.

In some games, sure. But i have seen more than a few games where the Gm used point levels for stratifying NPCs too, so a given NPC if he was intended to represent a "newbie" would be built on points under X and a more veteran PC would be built on X+100 or somesuch.

 

But certainly, if your perspective of game play is "points dont matter for this game" then thr whole Com thing is a moot point. of course, that means the whole points dont matter thing is also a fine argument in support of not using com too.

 

 

90% of this thread is whining about differences which make no difference.

 

If you had finsihed that statement with "... in my games and games run just like mine" I would be in agreement.

 

But for some games... points matter.

and for other games... the presence of glaring stark "OC only" or NPC only" exceptions in a base core toolkit matter and can affect negatively the emjoyment of the game, not to mention causing glaring plot hole difficulty.

 

Consider that a Gm somewhwere has been running his supers game and introduced an alien race. Said alien minded race is immune to human mental class of mind stuff. Some of the aliens are allies to the players while others are invaders... maybe thing thanagaran "hawkigirl" if you want a source. New player shows up and has an interesting concept that is a character from these aliens. Now the Gm has several bad choices.

 

Say "no" because PCs cannot have an alien mind class as its unbalancing.

Say "yes" but force this character to be the one and only known case of those aliens who are affected by mental.

Say "yes" and somehow try and make this immunity thing work fine as a "dor dree" thingy. maybe suddenly all the mentalists the gang encounter have figured out how to breach the alien minds or maybe the party now never encounters mental powers.

 

The whacko notion of "here, these guys gain total for free" creates the problem underpinning the issue.

 

if instead, all the character were built "using the same chargen process" so that anyone who wanted this immunity had to pay X for it then adding in a PC of the alien type doesn't bring with it mechanical chargen problems.

[Fox1]

Re: Mental Powers

 

In some games' date=' sure. But i have seen more than a few games where the Gm used point levels for stratifying NPCs too.[/quote']

 

People make poor decisions all the time. I see no need to concern myself with them and certainly don't want a game designed around their needs.

 

 

But for some games... points matter.

and for other games... the presence of glaring stark "OC only" or NPC only" exceptions in a base core toolkit matter and can affect negatively the emjoyment of the game, not to mention causing glaring plot hole difficulty.

 

Such people are foolish.

 

Player A: I want to run a character who isn't a human type mind!

 

GM: Sorry, the campaign I'm running only has human type minds for players. But if you like you can buy defenses representing a rather different type of 'human' mind.

 

 

If that negatively affects their enjoyment of the game of for them, I suggest they grow up.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Would you support a rule which provided that Energy Blasts, by default, affect one "Class of Body", with the basic "Classes of body" being "Flesh and Bone", "Mineral", "Amorphous" and "Liquid/Gaseous", and you pay +10 points as an adder to add another "Class of Body" your energy blast affects?

(snip)

 

Such an approach would be interesting for some completely different gaming system, as an aside. Class of Mind, Class of Body, Class of Stun, all could be used elegantly in some system fundamentally built on this, and could allow for a combo of absolutes and variability. Nothing to do with HERO, unless of course one was rewriting it from the ground up (even then, personally, I wouldn't take this approach, but it is an interesting concept).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Such people are foolish.

 

Player A: I want to run a character who isn't a human type mind!

 

GM: Sorry, the campaign I'm running only has human type minds for players. But if you like you can buy defenses representing a rather different type of 'human' mind.

 

If that negatively affects their enjoyment of the game of for them, I suggest they grow up.

 

It's inetersting that every discussion (and tesuji's was an excellent one) of a character whose concept clearly justifies, within the campiagn parameters, being of a different class of mind is met with a response of, basically, "the player should find another character to play".

 

Now, if your answer was "This campaign is based around the Aliens being the enemy, and having an alien player character of that race would disrupt the campaign itself", I might still think there's too much rigidity, but I coiuld accept it as a necessary evil to maintain the integrity of the setting, and the campaign (perhaps the mega-plot will later explain why no member of this race would ever be an ally of the humans, or at least the info any alien would have, but never have voluntarily shared, with a human). But to say "No, you can't play an alien-class mind" solely because of the class of mind rules indicates, to me, that these rules alone curtail, rather than enhance, flexibility.

 

Tesuji notes the following choices (numberng mine):

 

1. Say "no" because PCs cannot have an alien mind class as its unbalancing.

 

2. Say "yes" but force this character to be the one and only known case of those aliens who are affected by mental.

 

3. Say "yes" and somehow try and make this immunity thing work fine as a "dor dree" thingy. maybe suddenly all the mentalists the gang encounter have figured out how to breach the alien minds or maybe the party now never encounters mental powers.

 

To his point #1, I am tempted to add "My campaign is too rigid to accomodate a character which would properly, reasonably and logically have a class of mind other than human."

 

The need to deny such characters in order to preserve balance (not for any campaign tone reason, but solely because allowing the PC exactly the same benefits as are provided to NPC's would be unbalancing) illustrates one of the problems with "Classes of Mind". There is a game benefit to having a mind which is not human-class. The basis of the Hero system is that benefits to ncharacters are statted out in terms of character points, not alklowed to NPC's but denied to PC's for balance reasons.

[tesuji]

Re: Mental Powers

 

Such people are foolish.

 

Player A: I want to run a character who isn't a human type mind!

 

GM: Sorry, the campaign I'm running only has human type minds for players. But if you like you can buy defenses representing a rather different type of 'human' mind.

 

 

If that negatively affects their enjoyment of the game of for them, I suggest they grow up.

 

Well then you are talking to me. So maybe i should.

 

See, I, in my apparently very ungrown-up fashion, am DISPLEASED when to support a rule need suddenly to stamp each alien race in my game as de facto "PC possible" for those with human class minds or "NPC only" for those who are not human class minds. It is an unelegant and unnecessary thing for me to have to tag on to races in my game and doesn't add any real benefit.

 

I am equally displeased in an alternative which is having whether members of a race can have a given trait, a rather ubiquitous one, or not being again determined by whether NPC or PC is stamped on their sheets.

 

Both strike me as very amateurish campaign design errors. I expect my players to treat PCs and NPCs they same, I expect their characters to, and this seems rather out of sorts if at the same time i decide to support the silly little rule by using such cludgy differentiations.

 

My game isn't made better by me deciding to have "immunity for free" for NPCs (huge blocks of NPCs) but not possible at all for PCs. That runs contrary to almost every campaign design notion i would consider in the bag of "decent design techniques."

 

Childish of me, i reckon.

 

But then again, other than "thats whats printed in this edition of the rules" I can see NO BENEFIT gained from deciding to include in a point driven mechanics game the notion of "immunity for free for this character SFX" instead of the way i have seen it WORK FINE IN PLAY for over two decades... IE let the SFX "alien mind" serve as simply the justification for purchasing the defense.

 

A fire elemental should be immune to fire... but i don't get to take "immunity to fire" for free... i have to buy it. That however has worked fine... so i dont see why the need was or how the game is better giving mental immunities for free.

 

Maybe one day, when I grow up, I will understand.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Mental Powers

 

A fire elemental should be immune to fire... but i don't get to take "immunity to fire" for free... i have to buy it. That however has worked fine... so i dont see why the need was or how the game is better giving mental immunities for free.

 

Maybe one day, when I grow up, I will understand.

 

If you're open to suggestions from someone else who clearly isn't mature enough to play these "big people games", may I suggest that the Fire Elemental be considered to have a Fire Class of Body, such that he is automatically immune to attacks which do not affect that Body Class? If it works for mental attacks, it should be equally elegant for physical attacks, shouldn't it?

 

[Why do I have a vision of that "attack/defense" matrix from Villains and Vigilantes running through my head? ]

[tesuji]

Re: Mental Powers

 

If you're open to suggestions from someone else who clearly isn't mature enough to play these "big people games", may I suggest that the Fire Elemental be considered to have a Fire Class of Body, such that he is automatically immune to attacks which do not affect that Body Class? If it works for mental attacks, it should be equally elegant for physical attacks, shouldn't it?

 

I agree. thats precisely my notion too.

 

After all, we all know HERO 5e is a game system that at its core embraces absolutes, right?

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I'd like to thank everyone for thier posts in this thread. I hadn't made a final decision on whether the Class of Minds rules was beneficial to the rules as it is presented or not.

 

The argument has boiled down to one thing:

 

Would the rules be better served if the Classes of Mind rule were removed as presented and redone to be an optional rule for the GM? (With the default being that Mental Powers affect everyone equally, based on whether they have an EGO stat or not.)

 

Based on the arguments presented here and taking into account the toolkit nature that the system is trying to achieve, I've been convinced that the Class of Minds should be removed and presented as an optional rule for the GM.

 

Thank you all for helping to improve my game. I'm glad you took an interest. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

Glad it helped!

 

I would argue that a potential retooling of CoM might be useful even in the core, but it would have to be fairly complete and detailed in order to account for all SFX (and not just type of being but type of mental attack, type of effect, etc.), at which point it amounts to a fairly bulky addition to the book and probably ends up becoming unwieldy even if "better" from a purist standpoint.

[zornwil]

Re: Mental Powers

 

I believe for things like computers which lack Ego but have INT.

 

However, it does beg the question why putting the computer on top of a robot body makes it immune, doesn't it? Of course, that begs the question whether cyberkinesis (which would logically affect both robot and computer) would also affect, say, a zombie. And, if not, how one would craft a mental power to affect the zombie? Necromancy, in Fantasy, of course. What if he's a zombie due to chemical stimulants applied to a corpse - no machines and no magic.

New CoM...resurrected dead beings. Of course it's less frequent, so it's typically bought as a +5 Adder. If it is the default class for an individual, bearing in mind that Lims on their powers will certainly add up to a greater cost discount for 5 points, they simply get a "free" -5 Disad to reflect that they have a default class that is less useful.

 

Gee, I'm glad CoM has made things simpler...so much simpler...the old way I would have just put a Lim across his powers, but CoM clearly demonstrates doing so is giving WAY too much of a cost break. Yes, more evidence of system improvement...