Magic Fountian

[APE]

I have an idea for a mage character who is a gateway for magical energy entering into this world.

 

Succor Xd6, All Magic +2, 0 End +1/2, Persistant +1/2, Explosion +1/2, Allways On -1/2.

 

This will cost 15 pts per die and allmost 16 pts if Inherant +1/4 is added.

 

This character is not for any specific campain.

 

Now for the Q & A

 

1. Would you allow this in your campain?

 

2. How many points would the Succor boost your powers and others?

i.e. say 3d6, max die roll (18,12,6)

standard effect (9,6,3)

roll before adventure

roll every so often durring adventure

roll every phase

 

Please all coments on this build are welcome.

[Blue Jogger]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I have an idea for a mage character who is a gateway for magical energy entering into this world.

 

Succor Xd6, All Magic +2, 0 End +1/2, Persistant +1/2, Explosion +1/2, Allways On -1/2.

 

This will cost 15 pts per die and allmost 16 pts if Inherant +1/4 is added.

 

This character is not for any specific campain.

 

Now for the Q & A

 

1. Would you allow this in your campain?

 

2. How many points would the Succor boost your powers and others?

i.e. say 3d6, max die roll (18,12,6)

standard effect (9,6,3)

roll before adventure

roll every so often durring adventure

roll every phase

 

Please all coments on this build are welcome.

 

 

1. I might allow it. It depends on several factors. One, is the special effect. It sounds like it is making the nearby area "more magical", but some magic isn't affected by the local mana. There is also alot of bookkeeping to calculating someone's active cost based on where someone was compared to the mage. So I might require Standard Effect rules instead of rolling.

 

I'd feel much better if it was part of base or a specific area that can't be moved around. Or an NPC.

 

2. Succor would eventually boost the mage's power by maximum dice roll. Basically it would be a roll (or consider it 3 by standard effect) every phase until the total equals the maximum dice roll as per Adjustment Powers. Each die would max out at 6 active points per die.

 

Succor is not allowed to work on Succor, even if it is a magical effect. That's just abusive. I might even state that Power Defense works against it unless you volunterary lower it. After all, if you are shielding yourself from magic, then you would be shielded against this.

 

There are campaign considerations to think about, if all superpowers are magic based that's alot different than I'm a mage and there are aliens, mutants, supertech, and lots of other weird things that aren't affected by standing close to a magic fountain.

 

If your campaign has limits (on damage classes, combat values, etc.) then the mage needs to honor them even if he's soaking in powerful magic constantly.

 

 

Side comments: The GM also has to figure out what this means. Does the nearby plants grow faster being in a higher magical area? Do the animals become more fantastic? Even if all of this turns out to be no. How visible is this effect from someone with detect magic. Is it like a bonfire on a moonless night screaming, "MAGIC, ALL YOU CAN EAT!" He may find that if he stands in a place long enough, the area becomes permenantly enchanted. While this has some immediate benefits, this may attract magical monsters that are looking for a place to live.

 

It does give a good reason for the character to be hunted by demons, other magicians, and possibly others who just want to kill him and hope that will close the gateway.

[APE]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I wanted both good and bad Consequences, Magical Bonfire oh yah. Oh forgot to mention he's for supper hero gaming.

[APE]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I also wanted an idea as to how the succor would boost so that I could price spell, and power frameworks w.o. going over limits.

[Silbeg]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I am not sure this would actually work, for several reasons.

 

1) I believe that you would actually need to have the continous advantage to get the constant effective. While the power is a constant power, it can only effect someone with an attack action. So, to give the ability to affect targets every phase, I would require the continous (see 5ER 134).

 

2) AE effects are stationary one created. One suggested way around this would be an AE (or explosion) Damage Shield. (I may require the +3/4 version for this). Then it might be allowable to have the AE move with the character (of course, Hero Designer doesn't allow this, but we would have to check to see why)

 

3) If he is a font for magic power, he probably doesn't affect himself. Personally Immune is assumed with a damage shield, so would be required as an advantage (this is per Steve Long), but is another reason to require the damage shield advantage.

 

I would probably also require the use of the Standard Effect rules, for simplicity.

 

Anpother major problem I would have is that Succor does not fade, so when targets are affected, it would not go away. This would be the worst red flag for the whole thing.

 

Because of this last problem, while I might allow the power, but only if based on Aid rather than Succor. Another advantage to using Aid is that it starts as 0 END... so no need to reduce the END.

 

37 Aid 1d6, Explosion (+1/2), Damage Shield (+1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Continuous (+1), all Magic powers simultaneously (+2) (55 Active Points); Always On (-1/2)

[prestidigitator]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I would also do this with Aid. Make it Persistant, then just say the Power acts at Maximum Effect (max rolled on the dice plus any Increased Maximum Effect bought for it) unless it is turned off by a Dispell or something (in which case it will require some Phases to build up again). Characters entering the area it affects will also require some time to be fully affected (since it builds up their Powers on a per-Phase basis).

 

Would I limit the Maximum Effect based on the distance, since it is an Explosion? Hmm. That's a tricky question. Maybe. It could be a good balancer.

 

With it being Persistant and the Explosion and such I would probably be tempted to use Standard Effect so that so many dice aren't being thrown around all the time, but whatever.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

this is kind of weird ... Succor theoretically has no Top End, but would I allow a character with an Alway On Succor to "reuse" it every phase?

 

Probably not, so it goes off once, I'd use the Standard Effect for simplicity, and persists forever. It would not need Continuous IMO since the AoE/Explosion automatically effects anyone entereing the field (including enemies BTW).

 

Also, I would rule that the character's powers are already "Enhanced" meaning the Succor doesn't work on your powers because the ones you bought are assumed to be at the already enhanced level since you are the source of the boost. It doesn't mean I'd allow your powers to exceed Campaign Maxes if there were any, that's just the special effect of being you and a balance.

 

I'd allow it at moderately low levels. Say 2-4 Dice/Levels. Kind of a cool idea.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

Whether I'd allow it would be all about context. If all the PCs have powers based on magic then probably not. If all the villains have powers based on magic, then maybe. if the only magic wielder in the game was the character themself then no, no, no.

 

To my mind it doesn't simulate the idea of magic 'entering the world' as it only works in a very small area around the character as built. I'd be inclined to do that effect another way, or at very least whack some megascale on there.

 

Succor is a weird, broken thing, lurking in the rulebook. It has no morals whatsoever. It will abuse and be abused indiscriminately, and enjoy it. We can't be having that now, can we?

 

Building something like this I think you need to consider in more depth what it is you are after. Define it in non-game terms ( a bit more than 'a portal for magic entreing the world') - what it does, what the limits are, who it effects, how you stop it....then we will have a clearer idea of what we are after here.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

Succor is a weird' date=' broken thing, lurking in the rulebook. It has no morals whatsoever. It will abuse and be abused indiscriminately, and [i']enjoy [/i]it. We can't be having that now, can we?

Except it seems every example we see of its breaking things revolves around Reduced End Cost, and even after this is pointed out over and over again and everyone seems to agree that allowing 0 End Succors is in general a bad idea, it is still one of the most frequent builds people bring up for some reason! Succor itself isn't all that broken. Succor plus Reduced End Cost definitely is (except maybe in specific cases carefully designed for balance)!

 

There is absolutely no reason Aid couldn't instead be used for this construct in a very elegant way, as I mentioned above. Most agree that Aid is not broken; far from it, in fact. Even using it to boost, "all magic," at once is fairly expensive and can be balanced by the GM pretty nicely (especially if you do things like using the common sense approach of saying that the Aid will take some time to boost Framework slots that have just been switched to); I think it doesn't get as wrong as some Frameworks can by themselves anyway.

 

I certainly think it is reasonable that Always On be reduced to a -0 if it doesn't have the potential of boosting some enemy magic or other harmful effect that would be detrimental to the character.

[APE]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

What I am going for is that this person has become an extreamly magical creature that increases the ambient magic in the area. Any creature, mage, and spell that uses magic as a SFX entering the area would be boosted. Also I would expect him to be hunted by various nefarious people to increase their own power. I do NOT want this to be an abusive power, thou I was hoping it would alow me to save a few points by buying smaller but more numerous powers. Maybe I should also look into Change Enviorment.

[Mister E]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I'd use it. As soon as I read your Post, APE, I thought of an NPC in my Champions Champaign I haven't statted out yet, that I thought I could use it on. I'm not sure how I'd tinker with it, but it's a fun idea.

 

~ Mister E

[APE]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I'd use it. As soon as I read your Post, APE, I thought of an NPC in my Champions Champaign I haven't statted out yet, that I thought I could use it on. I'm not sure how I'd tinker with it, but it's a fun idea.

 

~ Mister E

 

 

Glad I could pass on an idea.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

Except it seems every example we see of its breaking things revolves around Reduced End Cost' date=' and even after this is pointed out over and over again and everyone seems to agree that allowing 0 End Succors is in general a bad idea, it is [i']still[/i] one of the most frequent builds people bring up for some reason! Succor itself isn't all that broken. Succor plus Reduced End Cost definitely is (except maybe in specific cases carefully designed for balance)!

 

There is absolutely no reason Aid couldn't instead be used for this construct in a very elegant way, as I mentioned above. Most agree that Aid is not broken; far from it, in fact. Even using it to boost, "all magic," at once is fairly expensive and can be balanced by the GM pretty nicely (especially if you do things like using the common sense approach of saying that the Aid will take some time to boost Framework slots that have just been switched to); I think it doesn't get as wrong as some Frameworks can by themselves anyway.

 

I certainly think it is reasonable that Always On be reduced to a -0 if it doesn't have the potential of boosting some enemy magic or other harmful effect that would be detrimental to the character.

 

I quite agree that Aid is just doozy. I don't see the need for succor, at least in the form it is in, in the rules at all. If you want an aid that has to be maintained, limit aid. Succor works differently to aid in that it can just keep going (and doesn't have a fade rate), so 0 END (or massive charges) make it very abusive, you are right, but even without that I don't see the need for a power that works in a contrary fashion to the adjustment power rules. Just confusing IMO.

 

Given APE's description I think change environment or even some sort of transform (change environment to non-recharging magic END reserve) would be a better bet.

[JmOz]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I've used an Aid version as a base power for somewhile, it actualy has worked fairly well for the effect (He can "power up" for a cosmic fight, but it only lasts about 5 min)

[Black Rose]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

Except it seems every example we see of its breaking things revolves around Reduced End Cost' date=' and even after this is pointed out over and over again and everyone seems to agree that allowing 0 End Succors is in general a bad idea, it is [i']still[/i] one of the most frequent builds people bring up for some reason! Succor itself isn't all that broken. Succor plus Reduced End Cost definitely is (except maybe in specific cases carefully designed for balance)!

I think that is due to nearly everyone, even those who never saw 4th Edition, wanting the old Aid back. The new Aid seems too expensive for what we used to use it for, but Succor is a bit too optimized. If I want a power that boosts something, be it a characteristic or a power, and I want it to completely cut out when I'm done boosting it, then, according to the rules, Succor is the power for me.

 

Besides, we all know the way to detect an easy-to-munchkin power; everybody wants it! And looking at Succor, I can see why. You don't even need 0 END to make it chedder; just throw END Only To Activate on, then take the savings and put most in REC and some in END. You get your boost, only pay END once, and probably get it all back post-12. Plus you get a nice bump to STUN; and BODY, albeit slowly.

 

There is absolutely no reason Aid couldn't instead be used for this construct in a very elegant way, as I mentioned above. Most agree that Aid is not broken; far from it, in fact. Even using it to boost, "all magic," at once is fairly expensive and can be balanced by the GM pretty nicely (especially if you do things like using the common sense approach of saying that the Aid will take some time to boost Framework slots that have just been switched to); I think it doesn't get as wrong as some Frameworks can by themselves anyway.

 

I certainly think it is reasonable that Always On be reduced to a -0 if it doesn't have the potential of boosting some enemy magic or other harmful effect that would be detrimental to the character.

The main reason not to use Aid in this case is the high cost versus low payoff. You want to boost all SFX: Magic effects in a given area by 18 AP, possibly with a reduced effect further from the center of the effect. Silbeg's writeup cost 37 RP for one die of effect. That seems a little extreme to me.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

You know what gets me ... the old Aid has a lot of the same wording as the new Aid. I pointed this out to my GM who went "Really?" I went "Yeah. You've been playing it wrong."

[prestidigitator]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

You don't even need 0 END to make it [(Succor)] chedder; just throw END Only To Activate on' date=' then take the savings and put most in REC and some in END. You get your boost, only pay END once, and probably get it all back post-12. Plus you get a nice bump to STUN; and BODY, albeit slowly.[/quote']

I consider Costs End Only to Activate to be essentially the same as Costs 0 End in the case of Constant Powers like Succor and Suppress. Consider it included in my original statement. As long as you actually do have to continue to pay End to maintain a use of Succor, it isn't all that bad of a Power. Even using Continuous Charges (as long as you don't do something really munchkiny like abuse the Charges value cap) doesn't make it all that bad.

 

Being able to maintain Succor for free however, along with its cumulative uncapped nature, is game breaking. It is a very easy construct to spot and disallow. Once you are aware of that and willing to put your foot down, Succor isn't a problem. At all.

 

EDIT: Oh, and let's not get into End Reserves; they are broken by themselves IMO. "Here! Buy a Characteristic at 1/5 it value with almost no differences or drawbacks! In fact, you could argue that the benefits (Recovers even when character is unconscious, Non-Persistant Powers continue to function even when character is Stunned or Knocked Out) vastly outweigh the drawbacks (oooh...character can't take extra Recoveries...ouch! )."

[prestidigitator]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

You know what gets me ... the old Aid has a lot of the same wording as the new Aid. I pointed this out to my GM who went "Really?" I went "Yeah. You've been playing it wrong."

How so? I think the major concerns people have about Aid now is that it costs double what it did and Fades even for Characteristics/Powers not adjusted above their starting values. That it doesn't cost End by default may make up for this slightly, but not completely. Are you claiming it was always this way? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure there were specific clauses that said you could (cumulatively) Aid Characteristics/Powers to their starting values without Fades, and I know it costed 5 points per d6 in 4E.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

How so? I think the major concerns people have about Aid now is that it costs double what it did and Fades even for Characteristics/Powers not adjusted above their starting values. That it doesn't cost End by default may make up for this slightly' date=' but not completely. Are you claiming it was always this way? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure there were specific clauses that said you could (cumulatively) Aid Characteristics/Powers to their starting values without Fades, and I [i']know[/i] it costed 5 points per d6 in 4E.

The only real change to AID how I ever used it was now it doesn't cost END by default. And it's worth 10pts/D6 instead of 5. Unless it were defined as Healing AID it always faded ... but looking back over the rules, perhaps we were wrong afterall on that point. I think 10pts it what it's worth, and believe it was underpriced in 4E. But then, I'm in the AID Was Fixed, Finally camp.

[Zed-F]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

Ah, a thread about succor I haven't commented on.

 

Succor is quite possible to abuse, but so is Aid. Just slap 'affects all powers of a given SFX' on it and most GMs will look twice before allowing it. The same holds true for any power with lots of advantages, of course.

 

On the other hand, it's quite possible to build nice balanced Succor-based power with a minor application of house rules and some common sense. Even using Costs END to Activate, 0 END, or what have you. It's just a matter of building a power that passes the smell test. Do you guys really consider the following to be unbalanced?

 

1d6 Succor, Continuous(+1), Costs END to Activate(+1/4), Limit of 20 AP of Effect(-0): Active Cost 11

 

vs.

 

+20 STR: Active Cost 20

 

Sure you pay less for the Succor, but you get a whole host of disadvantages to go along with it, such as it costs an END per phase to maintain, it's visible, it doesn't give figureds, it costs an attack action to activate, it takes several phases to build up, and it goes away if you get stunned. About the only thing it has going for it is you can apply the power to someone else with a no range attack action.

 

Succor isn't cheddar. It's not even necessarily cheddar when you use it in combination with Reduced END, though that certainly is one sign that the power construct could be cheddar. What makes a power that uses Succor into cheddar is trying to make an unbalancing construct using it. And what is unbalancing depends in part on the campaign standards and campaign power level.

[APE]

Re: Magic Fountian

 

I see succor as a continuos aid that fades imedieatly after it is turned off, max boost is max roll on die, and increase max boost by 2 for 1cpt. So in my example above of 3d6 would have a uper limit of 18, 12, 6 depending on how close to ground zero. Some other things I wanted with this is that any spell cast at me from outside the area would also be boosted good or bad. Also I would take damage from dispells and suppresses for magic even if I myself cast them because of a feedback loop which I would have done with a vulnerability.