RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

[Derek Hiemforth]

(This will be non-NGD post number 2000 for me, so I thought I'd make it an interesting one, instead of just some "me too" addendum somewhere...

 

What would you all think of allowing the cost of Powers to be shared by multiple characters in certain circumstances?

 

There's already a bit of precedent for this, considering that super teams often share the cost of their Base or Vehicle, etc. But what about extending that concept further, and allowing characters to share the cost of Powers (or even Power Frameworks)? Since the cost is shared, all of the contributing characters would have to be present, willing, and able to make whatever contribution the SFX require in order for the Power to be used. It might make some effects that are currently tricky a little easier to build. For example...

• Building the Voltron-style character, where multiple characters combine into one. Currently, it requires a fair amount of mechanical hoop-jumping via Duplication or other assorted stuff. But what if the "component" characters could share the cost of a Summon? Presto! Easily done. Summon Voltron costs 100 points (or whatever), and each of the five component characters pays 20 points.
• Four Elemental Lords each have an appropriate Energy Blast for their respective element, but they can "team-up" to use a much more powerful blast of raw elemental energy. They just buy a larger Energy Blast (or even just additional dice of their existing Energy Blast) and split the cost between them.
• An order of seers can get misty glimpses of the future, but only when all of them are present. They share the cost of the Precognitive Clairsentience.
• In the Challenge of the Super Friends cartoon, the Legion of Doom has some kind of doomsday gadget in almost every episode. However, the inventor of the doomsday gadget varies (sometimes it's Luthor, sometimes it's Brainiac, sometimes it's Grodd, sometimes it's Toyman, etc.), and they only ever have one doomsday gadget at a time. Rather than Luthor, Brainiac, Grodd, and Toyman each buying separate Variable Power Pools for their gadgets (which would allow them to each use their own pool at the same time), what if they shared the cost of a single Legion of Doom Mastermind Gadget Pool (that any of them could use if all agreed, but only one of them at a time is using it).

Obviously, as with most anything, there's potential here for abuse. But with proper GM oversight, I think this could allow for some interesting and useful effects.

 

Any thoughts?

[Fitz]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

It seems like a reasonable idea to me, and I'd have no particular problem with it. Assuming the GM enforces Active Point limits in the campaign, there's no real reason that I can see to disallow this construction. The "Ritual" Limitation goes part of the way to achieving it, but doesn't quite make it.

[austenandrews]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

I've let players do it before. Making it an explicit option is cleaner than some of the mechanical hoop-jumping involved with, say, having each character buy a power and the others buy Aid to affect it.

[ghost-angel]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

I think it's a good idea, allows for "crossing the streams" so to speak.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

No problem with it at all, Derek. A very sound idea, and one I've toyed with myself in the past.

[prestidigitator]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

I tend to use the Requires Multiple Users Limitation for this (I think I have the name correct). I believe it was Ritual in Fantasy Hero and may have gone under the guise of a different name somewhere else, but finally made it into 5ER in any case. It may require a little tweaking here and there, but is generally along the same lines.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

Yep, I've looked at Requires Multiple Users for this too. The main issue with RMU is that it's still possible to use the Power even with fewer-than-optimal users, and the Limitation value doesn't go up if it isn't possible at all to use the Power with fewer than the total number of users. I suppose you could just expand the RMU Limitation to include a value increase for that circumstance, but that wouldn't be as much fun as talking about allowing multiple characters to split the cost of Powers...

[Sean Waters]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

RMU is a bit odd to my mind: if you don't have the required number of users you can still use the power - it just gives OCV penalties...

 

I like your idea in principle, Derek, although there are (of course) other ways to do it - this is simple to build and use.

 

The potential though is that if you have four villains sharing a mega-kill device and they would normally have spent 100 points apiece on offensive powers, you potentially now have a 400 point power to contend with: the way Hero works, anything too far off the campaign norm is likely to be near unbeatable.

 

I do like the idea of four characters all contributing points to a joint multiform though Given the right powers and players something like this could be excellent.

 

To one way of looking at it it is no more abusive than a team base or vehicle, where cost has been shared.

[Dust Raven]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

I use something like this from time to time, but only for Foci obviously. Basically, no matter how many people chip in, there is only the one Power, but anyone in the group that paid for it can use it. I usually allow for the x2 equipment for +5 points for this, allowing the group to purchase team equipment for a reduced cost (such as matching uniforms and radios).

[devlin1]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

Hey hey. Occasional lurker, infrequent poster.

 

I too like the idea. Just to quantify things, if this were my game and more than one character were sharing a VPP, I'd have them each pay individual Control Costs in full, and split the Pool Cost. This way each can have different Limitations applied to reflect different methods of using the Pool.

 

Part of me wants to apply no Limitation at all for the sharing aspect, regardless of the specifics (e.g., framework or no framework). PCs don't split the cost for Vehicles/Bases, but then again, they don't all have to get together for one of them to take the team's supercar out for a spin. That makes another part of me want to scale it with the number of people involved. A Power that can only be used by nine people working in tandem should get a larger Limitation, IMO, than one that's only divided between two. But that's splitting hairs, really.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

A Power that can only be used by nine people working in tandem should get a larger Limitation' date=' IMO, than one that's only divided between two.[/quote']Using this method, it *is* a larger "Limitation" (although that isn't how it works mechanically). If you've got a 90 point power that only requires two people working in tandem, then each is paying 45 points for it. If the same power requires nine people working in tandem, then each is only paying 10 points for it.

 

The power as a whole isn't getting less expensive, but the cost to each member of the company is going down.

[devlin1]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

Using this method, it *is* a larger "Limitation" (although that isn't how it works mechanically). If you've got a 90 point power that only requires two people working in tandem, then each is paying 45 points for it. If the same power requires nine people working in tandem, then each is only paying 10 points for it.

 

The power as a whole isn't getting less expensive, but the cost to each member of the company is going down.

True, but that's part of the tradeoff. It's more convenient to get that one dude to show up than it is to coordinate schedules between those other eight jerks.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

The potential though is that if you have four villains sharing a mega-kill device and they would normally have spent 100 points apiece on offensive powers' date=' you potentially now have a 400 point power to contend with: the way Hero works, anything too far off the campaign norm is likely to be near unbeatable.[/quote']

 

But very much in superhero genre and a few other action oriented ones too.

 

I don't think it is something you'd want to use too often but seeing a team of villains that you _know_ you cannot attack head on as their offence and defence are unbeatable means the GM (if he's worth his salt) has left a backdoor somewhere that you have to find.

 

For the GM it provides the early game satisfaction of demonstrating the superiority of your troops over the heroes and then the players get ultimate satisfaction of getting their own back.

 

It does require the right players though (I have to contend with one player who will not allow his character to be taken prisoner. I can't rely on a plot where that happens as his character will die before being captured).

 

 

Doc

[Adventus]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

I was thinking along these lines a few days ago. This again would be a great use of the threshold framework that KillerShrike created. The threshold would be based on how many PCs are there to 'power' the framework. It would allow those gestalt characters that are kludgey under the present system.

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

It's a classic, so I wouldn't have any problem allowing it in. As far as doing it, I'd probably use the framework of making it a Limitation, rather than just simply dividing the cost. In most cases, same net effect, but works better for me, especially if other Limits are placed on it as well.

 

So, for two people (Aurora+Northstar, for example), I'd work it as in effect, the other person serves as an OAF that could be taken away/denied the other person, so -1 to start. If the person doesn't have to be in contact, lesser limit depending on distance. If only one can use the power at a time, some extra lockout limit. More people that need to be around/in contact for the power to work, bigger the limit.

[Fenixcrest]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

I like doing it with Aid. For example, every character has an energy blast which is expressed as a multipower. One slot is the blast(call it Super Shot), one slot is an AID Super Shot (not usable on self, -1/2). Maybe some characters don't have the AID(so their Super Shot is not in a multipower). Maybe some of them just have the Super Shot, and no AID, but they also have Naked Advantages for Super Shot (with Lockout).

[zornwil]

Re: RFC: Sharing the Cost of Powers

 

I recently allowed/actually encouraged such a thing for a PC with NPCs. Our mage-scientist needed to monitor the comings and goings into this dimension, on this planet (he's a dimensional traveller himself), along with many other requirements, a fairly powerful ability including an alarm and an attempt to stop any such intrusions, the last of these hard to do against a really powerful traveller of course (since they typically would build a spell that would build up against it or the like). He was consulting with the other great mages of the world who would be inclined to talk. I indicated each character could contribute points from their VPP, and modelled it using the RPs, ignoring any AP restrictions (which in theory would be according to some sort of apportionment based on contribution or such, and there were enough APs anyway if I did such a schema).

 

PS - but I didn't have the cool ideas from Dereck here - nice post, Dereck!

 

PPS - I should add, when I first saw this thread I saw "RFC" in the beginning and nearly gasped, that's an acronym for a project request at work, I'm thinking "NOOOO, NO RFC, NOT HERE!"