Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

[Smokeless Joe]

I’ve been away from the Hero System for a LONG time so please be gentle. I’m trying to understand some of the basic game mechanics better.

 

Question: Why is the active point cost for a power in a multipower limited to the number of points in the multipiower reserve? Is it a game balance issue? Do I not understand this rule?

 

Example:

 

Master Blaster has a multipower with a 50 point reserve. He wants three slots in this multipower:

1. Kiloblast: 10d6 Energy Blast

2. Megablast: 15d6 Energy Blast with 0 DCV Concentration limitation (+1/2)

3. Gigablast: 20d6 Energy Blast with Concentration (+1/2) and 2x Increased Endurance (+1/2)

 

My understanding is that this is an illegal multipower because slots 2 and 3 have active point costs greate than the 50 point reserve. Slot 2 has 75 active points and slot 3 has 100 active points.

 

But why is this illegal? Why is this active point limitation in place?

 

Thanks!

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Active Points are the points that affect things in the game-- thus they are "ACTIVE".

 

Normally you would set aside some amont of character points for a Power to affect things with, 50 in your example. If you had another Power, you'd set aside some amount of points for it as well, and so on.

 

That is fine and well, and after you had done so you could then use all such Powers simultaneously.

 

However, there are some Powers that a character does not want to use together. Perhaps they represent different facets of a conceptual meta power like "Fire Emmission", perhaps they are mutually exclusive, perhaps the character can't pay the END for using all of them at the same time, whatever.

 

That is were the MP comes into play. It says, basically, you have set aside a reserve of X number of points that can be Active and effect the game at any given moment; what you use it for in a particular segment is largely irrelevant -- X Points is X Points whether that be xd6 of damage or an equivalent amount of points of something else. However to keep you from having an infinite selection of Powers -- a cosmic VPP essentially, you must pay a relatively small surcharge for each Power that can use this reserve.

 

 

This is very efficient and effective. However, since the character still only has X number of points Actively affecting play it is still fair to other characters that paid for their Powers straight up.

 

If a character instead put X points into a Reserve and it applied to the REAL COST of slots rather than the ACTIVE POINTS of slots they would have a gross point advantage controlled only by how many Limitations were placed on individual slots. This would be unbalanced, unfair, and mathematically unsound.

[gojira]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Yeah, pretty much it's a balance issue. Just keep adding lims to power number three and see how obscene it gets. Gestures, takes extra time, charges (1!!), only at night, activation 14-, etc. etc.

 

Then add about 10 slots like that. Really abusive. And it's worse if the player adds even more, 20 or 30 slots like that.

 

 

IMHO, a multipower is a super power or device that's powered from one source: the character him or herself, a battery, etc. The power can be shifted around (or "reconfigured" and released differently with an all ultra-slot multipower), but it can't exceed the maximum level of the power source itself. Limiting the active points in a slot to the active reserve enforces that idea.

 

But on the meta-gaming side, it's a play balance issue.

 

 

If you *do* want a bunch of cheesey powers, pick an EC like "Ultimate Power" and load it up. For certain types of campaings like world class supers, Dragonball Z wuxia, etc., I'd probably allow such a thing. It's much harder to abuse than the MP though, 'cause you're paying at least 50% cost instead of 10% cost.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Question: Why is the active point cost for a power in a multipower limited to the number of points in the multipiower reserve? Is it a game balance issue? Do I not understand this rule?

 

Example:

 

Master Blaster has a multipower with a 50 point reserve. He wants three slots in this multipower:

1. Kiloblast: 10d6 Energy Blast

2. Megablast: 15d6 Energy Blast with 0 DCV Concentration limitation (+1/2)

3. Gigablast: 20d6 Energy Blast with Concentration (+1/2) and 2x Increased Endurance (+1/2)

 

My understanding is that this is an illegal multipower because slots 2 and 3 have active point costs greate than the 50 point reserve. Slot 2 has 75 active points and slot 3 has 100 active points.

 

But why is this illegal? Why is this active point limitation in place?

 

Others have covered the "why" already. Consider the readily available option for the purchase. The player could buy a 10d6 Energy Blast (50 points), with +5d6 Concentrate 0 DCV (+20 points) and +5d6 EB with Concentration 0 DCV and 2x END (+15 points) for 85 points. This is mechanically identical to the proposed multipower.

 

There is a recent thread entitled "Something I Just Noticed (and dislike) about Multipowers" which discusses this issue in considerable detail. You may want to take a look at that rather than revisit it here.

[Lucius]

Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Look at it this way:

 

The reserve points are so many liters of water.

 

The reserve slots are jars you can put water in.

 

If you have a 50 pt reserve, you only have 50 liters of water. You can (if you set the slots up as "multis" or flexible slots) have 10 liters in one jar, 25 in another, and 15 in another. Or you can (if the jar is "big" enough) put all 50 liters in one jar.

 

If I were running the game, I would let you buy those big "jars" (that is, those huge slots) - but I'd warn you that you're wasting points. It doesn't matter if you have a 100 liter jar if you only have 50 liters of water - the most active points you can have in a slot is equal to the points in your reserve.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Now try explaining "right" and "left" to a palindromedary

[BNakagawa]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Look at it this way, if 60 points buys you the multipower reserve, then 6 points will buy you an ultra slot, which is for all intents and purposes a 60 point power.

 

Commonly used for different attack options, 6 points buys you a 60 point attack that you can't use with any of the others.

 

The problem with letting people use 60 real rather than active point slots is that you quickly find it very profitable to create very limited but very powerful options all of which are mutually exclusive.

 

Example: 60 RP limited multipower

6u - 24d6 EB - only vs men -1 limitation

6u - 24d6 EB - only vs women -1 limitation

 

Assuming you can tell the difference (and maybe you need a third option for fighting genderless robots and such) then you've got 120 points of attack that you can pick at will for a measly 72 points.

[Bartman]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

To give another example. When I first started playing... way back in the day. We misunderstood this rule and played it backwards. I had a character who looked something like this:

 

Pts

30 Weapons: Multipower 30pt Pool

3u 1) Compressive Blaster: Energy Blast (pd) 18d6, 4 charges (-1), OAF (-1)

3u 2) Stunner: Energy Blast (ed) 18d6, 4 charges (-1), OAF (-1)

3u 3) Grenades: Energy Blast (ed) 12d6, explosion (+1/2), 4 charges (-1), OAF (-1)

3u 4) Tranquilizer: Energy Blast 9d6, NND (+1) 4 charges (-1), OAF (-1)

3u 5) Rifle: RKA (pd) 4d6, AP (+1/2), 4 charges (-1), OAF (-1)

3u 6) Nets: Entangle 9d6, 4 charges (-1), OAF (-1)

etc... ad nausium.

 

Now there was a problem. Most everyone else payed about 60 pts for their single 12d6 Energy Blast. I got much, much, more than they did and I payed far less for it. And the disadvantages weren't really disadvantageous. If you took any single OAF away from the character, he had plenty more to fall back on. And despite charges, he had more than 40 total charges to use. So if he used up a single attack, he could easily move on to the next one. And he was vastly more flexable than any of the other characters.

 

The character inspired a re-read of the rules, which inspired a re-write of the character pretty quickly. And the game was much better for it.

 

I would say that it is possible to create a non-abusive MP using real instead of active points, and under certain circumstances a GM might accept it. But it is so easy to abuse the concept I for one would never go for it.

[Vondy]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

 

But why is this illegal? Why is this active point limitation in place?

 

Thanks!

The reason is that the multipower is a set number of active points available for the slots to use (depending on what kind of slots you buy). You can't use more active points than you have active points in the pool. Hero isn't a bank: it doesn't do loans. You can, however, have the multipower if you pay the excess active point cost of the slots whose powers exceed the available active points in the multipower on a 1 to 1 basis (IIRC).

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Hmm. For a Flexible Slot I don't really see much wrong with allowing the slot to be bigger than the Reserve. It means you would only have to boost the Reserve with an Adjustment Power to use the slot at higher effectiveness, rather than having to boost both the Reserve and the slot as you technically have to now. That's an interesting idea.

[Lucius]

Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Hmm. For a Flexible Slot I don't really see much wrong with allowing the slot to be bigger than the Reserve. It means you would only have to boost the Reserve with an Adjustment Power to use the slot at higher effectiveness' date=' rather than having to boost both the Reserve [i']and[/i] the slot as you technically have to now. That's an interesting idea.

 

Yes - a very good idea. I was just thinking the extra potential couldn't be tapped until experience was spent to increase the pool, but you're right, you could just Adjust the pool

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Pardon me while I adjust my palindromedary

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Question: Why is the active point cost for a power in a multipower limited to the number of points in the multipiower reserve? Is it a game balance issue? Do I not understand this rule?

As Hugh Nelson mentioned, we recently had a discussion about this. I recommend you read that thread. Long story short: I agree with you that this shouldn't be the case. We are apparently in a very small minority, however. The reason this is the rule is because, yes, such a MP construct could be abusive. Several people on this thread have posted examples of such cheesy builds. What many fail to recognize, IMO, is that there are plenty of non-cheesy, non-abusive builds for MPs based on real points. I gave examples in the other thread.

 

Example:

Master Blaster has a multipower with a 50 point reserve. He wants three slots in this multipower:

1. Kiloblast: 10d6 Energy Blast

2. Megablast: 15d6 Energy Blast with 0 DCV Concentration limitation (+1/2)

3. Gigablast: 20d6 Energy Blast with Concentration (+1/2) and 2x Increased Endurance (+1/2)

Note that the construct here (if it were legal) would cost 50+5+5+5=65 points (assuming the slots are all ultras). Some people balk at the idea of getting a 100 ap power for 65 points, but fail to see that you can do this already, and even better, outside of a MP:

 

20d6 EB, Conc (0 DCV), 2x END = 50 points

 

and that's perfectly legal. Why are the rules different inside a multipower than they are outside a multipower? Some completely discount the Limitations, as if they never mean anything. Your third slot costs 20 END and leaves you at 0 DCV.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

As Hugh Nelson mentioned, we recently had a discussion about this. I recommend you read that thread. Long story short: I agree with you that this shouldn't be the case. We are apparently in a very small minority, however. The reason this is the rule is because, yes, such a MP construct could be abusive. Several people on this thread have posted examples of such cheesy builds. What many fail to recognize, IMO, is that there are plenty of non-cheesy, non-abusive builds for MPs based on real points. I gave examples in the other thread.

 

 

Note that the construct here (if it were legal) would cost 50+5+5+5=65 points (assuming the slots are all ultras). Some people balk at the idea of getting a 100 ap power for 65 points, but fail to see that you can do this already, and even better, outside of a MP:

 

20d6 EB, Conc (0 DCV), 2x END = 50 points

 

and that's perfectly legal. Why are the rules different inside a multipower than they are outside a multipower? Some completely discount the Limitations, as if they never mean anything. Your third slot costs 20 END and leaves you at 0 DCV.

 

Because you can then buy

 

u5 20d6 Energy Blast, OAF (Magic Wand)

 

And THAT is starting to be a problem...

[incrdbil]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

At least with straight out purchase hijinks, you get les and less return for piling on limitations. The first -1 of limits on a straight purchase 50 point power saves you 25 poiints. Adding another -1 of limits , you go down to 17 points Sure, its cheaper, but that first -1 saved you 25 points--the next level only 8. Going to a total of -3 in limits takes you down to 12 points--in effect, that last level of -1 in limitations saves you 5 more points. Diminishing returns.

 

But with the above route, each -1 of limitations you add to a slot in effect adds 50 active points of power to that multipower slot--as long as you keep scrounging them up, you get a flat 50 active points of fun as your reward.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

*tosses his Eagles cap into the ring, considers stomping it, stops.*

 

What? I like that hat, even with the crappy season.

 

Good morning. I'm just going to explain this in a way similarly to how the Palindromedary did, but I'll use a little more math.

 

In answer to your question, yes, this is a balance issue. Primarily because in your example, the character is getting more Active Points in a power than he's ever had to spend on the power itself. You're giving a cat who spent 50 CP on a Multipower Framework a 100 point power, and it'll only cost him 10 points as an Ultra slot. That alone explains it.

 

Looked at another way, in your example, no one would have to pay more than a single point for a Multipower, because the powers build into it could be nearly anything. No where is the cost of the power measured appropriately against the value (You spent 1 point, but you're buying 200 point powers for 20 points each. Eep!) In order for the system to function properly, everything has to be paid for. In a Multipower, that means that you're spending points straight up to cover the most expensive power in the group; then you purchase the powers individually.

 

Does that clarify this at all?

 

In another example, we can do it the way you described, but we'd have to rework it and call it an Elemental Control, which gives you a baseline to work from (say, a 50 point EC) and then all powers purchased within the EC must themselves be 50 or more points, but they can be (and almost always are) more powerful than the EC, because the EC boosts the power of all abilities within it. The rule is, the Active points in the powers within the EC must be equal to or greater than the value of the EC itself, and purchased individually.

 

Helpful? Yes? No?

[Seenar]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

One can, of course, have a bigger reserve that is partially limited. For instance you can have

 

50 Real/ 50 Active Reserve

+

25 Real/ 50 Active Reseve, Full Phase (-1/2), OIF (-1/2).

 

A power using 50 active points or less, has no limitations forced on it.

A power using between 51 and 100 active points must use the OIF and take a full Phase.

 

Slots could be

 

5u 10d6 EB

5u 5d6 Drain

7u 20dr EB (OIF, Full Phase)

10m 8d6 EB 1/2 end

15m 10d6 Entangle (OIF, Full Phase)

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

I failed my EGO roll to avoid this discussion. Here we go again.

 

No it doesn't, because you can do that anyway outside of a Multipower. A straight-up puchase of a 100 point power with -1 worth of Lims is giving a cat(?) who spent 50 points a 100 point power.

 

Looked at another way, in your example, no one would have to pay more than a single point for a Multipower, because the powers build into it could be nearly anything.

A single point? How? A power cannot be "nearly anything". It must have limitations to bring it down to the appropriate real cost. Do you think Limitations aren't really worth anything? That they're just ways to save points that don't have any real effect in play? If so, then it's the Limitation values that are the problem, not the Multipower points.

 

No where is the cost of the power measured appropriately against the value (You spent 1 point, but you're buying 200 point powers for 20 points each. Eep!)

Eh? If you can fit a 200 point power into a 1 real point reserve, it means you've got -199 worth of limitations on it (or at least -134 in limitations with the round off). I'd say that even if you could find that many limitations to apply, any power with even -50 in limitations is going to be essentially useless.

 

In order for the system to function properly, everything has to be paid for. In a Multipower, that means that you're spending points straight up to cover the most expensive power in the group; then you purchase the powers individually.

It is being paid for. That's just the basic MP rule.

 

Would you be OK with this scenario:

 

Let's say I build a character with this one attack:

 

20d6 EB, 0 DCV Conc, 2xEND = 50 points

 

Let's say you let this into your game, figuring that if I miss, or fail to at least stun my target, or if there are multiple targets, I'm going to be a sitting duck for a full phase, and I'm going to be spending END four times faster than those with non-Limited 50 point powers.

 

After I've accumulated some experience, I want to spend it. I decide that I don't really need more *power* (after all, 20d6 is a lot already!), what I need is *flexibility*. So I make my one 50-point power into a Multipower with a 50-point reserve:

 

50 Reserve

5u 20d6 EB, 0 DCV Conc, 2xEND - This is the power I already had

5u 15d6 EB, 0 DCV Conc

5u 10d6 EB

 

I've spent an additional 15 points to increase my flexibility. I can choose to spend less END for a less powerful attack. And I can choose to spend less END and retain full DCV for an even less powerful attack.

 

What is wrong/unbalanced/abusive about this construct? Yes, I know it's illegal by the book. And I'm not asking about some other construct using different limitations like Focus or Charges or Only at Night or Not in an Intense Magnetic Field or Only vs. Humans etc. I'm asking about this particular construct.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

I don't think I understand.

 

My understanding of a Multipower is that the MP itself must be as high in AP as the most powerful ability within it; said another way, no power in the MP may have more AP than the MP proper.

 

Am I missing something, because I'm not understanding your post.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Yes. That's the way the rules *are*. But I, Smokeless Joe, and some others have made the argument that that isn't the way they *should be*. If Real Points are what you pay outside a Multipower, then Real Points should apply inside a Multipower.

 

Seenar's example, for instance, requires a 75 RP reserve to fit a 50 RP slot. This doesn't make sense to me.

[gojira]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

What is wrong/unbalanced/abusive about this construct?

 

Well, the character isn't really limited by his concetration and END requirements anymore, because he can choose to waive them. It should have taken an additional 50 points to get out of those things, not 15.

 

So, this seems more fair to me:

100 pt multipower

5u 20d6 EB conc, 2x END

7u 20d6 EB, conc

10u 20d6 EB

 

Now you can have a more flexible character, but it costs you 73 points more. Which I think is more in line with what the costs should be. 15 points is just to big of a break for me to swallow. Obviously, you don't feel that way, so we may have to just disagree.

 

Of course, the disadvantages are kinda silly now. A 10d6 ego blast would be a lot more useful in that first slot, and a 10d6 entangle in the second slot, but I'm sticking close to your example for brevity.

[stan da ork]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

I think gojira hit the nail on the head, and I'm going to try and restate what he said in a more general way:

 

The more slots you put in a Mulitpower, the less any particular slot's Limitations limit you. By basing the number of points you can place in a slot on Active Points, and only applying Limitations to the slot cost, you get a fair discount, considering the less-limiting nature of the Limitations.

 

To use your example, the character can fire a 10d6 EB with no restrictions, a 15d6 EB while at 0 DCV, or a 20d6 EB for double END while at 0 DCV. Therefore, if the character doesn't think he'll Stun his target, or if there are lots of targets, or if he doesn't want to use END as fast, he can just use the 10d6 EB. However, if there is only one target, or all the targets are engaged with other team members and ignoring the character, or if he knows the target will likely be Stunned by a bigger attack, the character can fire one of his bigger slots, and the Limitations really aren't affecting him in any way. If no one is swinging at you, 0 DCV doesn't mean anything. And if you have enough END to finish the fight, it doesn't matter how much you spend on those last couple attacks, because the fight is over and it all comes back relatively quickly out of combat.

 

Now, I too have seen what you are complaining about in the system - you can't make a Multipower with a "big, limited, final attack slot." You can't make an energy rifle with a slot that does more damage but uses all the remaining charges, or anything like that, because AP is the cap. However, I would say that after some experience with the system, you can do this, and in a balance, rules-official way. I'll continue with your example, but I'm going to drop the Concentration only slot.

 

50 Power Blast: Multipower, 50 Point Reserve

5u Standard Blast: EB 10d6

2u Ultra Blast: EB 10d6 (50 AP), Concentration (0 DCV, -1/2), Increased END Cost (x2 END, -1/2)

 

PLUS

 

25 EB +10d6 (50 AP), Concentration (0 DCV, -1/2), Increased END Cost (x2 END, -1/2), Can Only be Used with Ultra Blast slot (-0)

 

You pay 82 points, and can either use a 10d6 EB with no restrictions, or a 20d6 EB at 0 DCV for double END cost. You get the Power construct you want, and you pay the appropriate number of points for it.

[Mr. Negative]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

And, as this discussion is evidently both Persistent and Sticky, I can't avoid chiming in with what I suggested in the other discussion thread.

 

If you want to allow the Active Points cost of Multipower Slots to exceed the points of the Multipower Pool itself, then consider putting a partial limitation on part of the multipower pool itself:

 

Only usable to exceed Multipower Slot active points limits.

 

Then you could have a 50 Real/50 Active multipower, with an additonal 50 points in the multipower--but only for individual slots to exceed the 50 point active point limit (and only up to 100 active points). This multipower construct doesn't allow you to use MORE powers at any given time, and doesn't allow you to create uberpowerful but limited slots, but does allow you to have individual, more specialized slots that don't "break the multipower bank".

 

If you are of a mind that this is a very, very good thing, then you can consider the value of the above limitation very highly (say, -99), which would allow you to increase your active points limit by 100 points by only spending one real point.

 

If you are of a mind that this limitation is very questionable, then assign it a smaller limitation (say -0.5), which allows you to spend 20 points to increase your active points limits by 30 points.

 

I myself would be inclined to cost it at a -2, I think, though I might start it out at a -1 limitation just to see how it worked.

 

Poof! Suddenly you have a multipower which allows you to exceed the active points cap, and follows all the normal HERO system rules.

[incrdbil]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

If you want to allow the Active Points cost of Multipower Slots to exceed the points of the Multipower Pool itself, then consider putting a partial limitation on part of the multipower pool itself:

 

Only usable to exceed Multipower Slot active points limits.

 

 

 

This is a limitation?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

To use your example, the character can fire a 10d6 EB with no restrictions, a 15d6 EB while at 0 DCV, or a 20d6 EB for double END while at 0 DCV.

 

I'll continue with your example, but I'm going to drop the Concentration only slot.

 

50 Power Blast: Multipower, 50 Point Reserve

5u Standard Blast: EB 10d6

2u Ultra Blast: EB 10d6 (50 AP), Concentration (0 DCV, -1/2), Increased END Cost (x2 END, -1/2)

 

PLUS

 

25 EB +10d6 (50 AP), Concentration (0 DCV, -1/2), Increased END Cost (x2 END, -1/2), Can Only be Used with Ultra Blast slot (-0)

 

You pay 82 points, and can either use a 10d6 EB with no restrictions, or a 20d6 EB at 0 DCV for double END cost. You get the Power construct you want, and you pay the appropriate number of points for it.

 

Lots of good discussion snipped as I want to focus on the example. You could simply buy:

 

50 10d6 EB [costs 5 END]

 

17 +5d6 EB, Concentrate (0 DCV) [costs +2 END = 7]

6 +5d6 EB, Concentrate (0 DCV), x6 END [costs 2 x 6 = 12 END so entire blast costs 19 END]

 

Cost of 73 points in total. You can use a 10d6 EB normally, up to 15d6 at 0 DCV and up to 20d6 for 19 END (sorry, couldn't get exactly 20).

 

This is a discount of 27 points from a 20d6 EB, and an increase of 23 points from a 20d6 EB, Conc 0 DCV, 2x END. Seems reasonable to me.

 

Note that, if you had other powers in your Multipower, the second two +5d6 EB's could simply add to that slot.

[stan da ork]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

A much better build than mine. I bow before your rules-foo, Hugh.

 

Oh, and repped.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Multipower active points vs. reserve points: why?

 

Well' date=' the character isn't really limited by his concetration and END requirements anymore, because he can choose to waive them. It should have taken an additional 50 points to get out of those things, not 15.[/quote']

By that logic, *no* limitations are really limiting, because you can always choose not to use a limited power! In a very real sense, it *does* take 50 points to get out of those limitations - you give up 10d6 = 50 points. Why should you have to pay 50 points for a multipower slot, when the same 50 points would buy you the full power straight up?

 

So, this seems more fair to me:

100 pt multipower

5u 20d6 EB conc, 2x END

7u 20d6 EB, conc

10u 20d6 EB

That's a ridiculous example. Who would buy such a thing? Why would you ever use one of the first two slots?

 

Now you can have a more flexible character, but it costs you 73 points more. Which I think is more in line with what the costs should be. 15 points is just to big of a break for me to swallow. Obviously, you don't feel that way, so we may have to just disagree.

And why would anyone want to pay 73 points to buy off 50 points worth of Limitations?

 

The more slots you put in a Mulitpower' date=' the less any particular slot's Limitations limit you.[/quote']

I disagree with this basic premise. I'd say: The more slots you put in a Multipower, the more points you've spent on *flexibility* as opposed to *power*. Limitations are just as limiting as always (if you don't think so, then you should vary the value of the limitations). Remember, Limitations don't limit *you*, they limit a power. Disadvantages are what limit you.

 

If you buy ten ultra slots for a 50-point multipower, you've spent as much as someone with a single 100-point power, or two different 50-point powers bought separately (which can be used together in a MPA).

 

By basing the number of points you can place in a slot on Active Points, and only applying Limitations to the slot cost, you get a fair discount, considering the less-limiting nature of the Limitations.

No you don't, as I showed with Seenar's and gojira's examples. Let me illustrate it again:

 

Two powers:

50 10d6 EB

50 20d6 EB, 2x END, 0 DCV

Total cost: 100 points, and they can be used together as a MPA

 

Multipower (Book Legal):

100 Reserve

5 10d6 EB

10 20d6 EB, 2x END, 0 DCV

Total Cost: 115 points, and they cannot be used together as an MPA.

 

15 points more for less utility. (And do you really think the limitations in the MP above are less limiting than they are in the full buy two powers above?)

 

I say, if you can only use 50 Real points of power at a time, you shouldn't have to pay more than 50 Real points for the Multipower Reserve.

 

To use your example, the character can fire a 10d6 EB with no restrictions, a 15d6 EB while at 0 DCV, or a 20d6 EB for double END while at 0 DCV. Therefore, if the character doesn't think he'll Stun his target, or if there are lots of targets, or if he doesn't want to use END as fast, he can just use the 10d6 EB. However, if there is only one target, or all the targets are engaged with other team members and ignoring the character, or if he knows the target will likely be Stunned by a bigger attack, the character can fire one of his bigger slots, and the Limitations really aren't affecting him in any way. If no one is swinging at you, 0 DCV doesn't mean anything. And if you have enough END to finish the fight, it doesn't matter how much you spend on those last couple attacks, because the fight is over and it all comes back relatively quickly out of combat.

 

Now, I too have seen what you are complaining about in the system - you can't make a Multipower with a "big, limited, final attack slot." You can't make an energy rifle with a slot that does more damage but uses all the remaining charges, or anything like that, because AP is the cap.

In my games, you can. I'm glad that you at least seem to understand the problem I'm talking about. As gojira said, we may just have to agree to disagree.

 

I'll continue with your example, but I'm going to drop the Concentration only slot.

 

50 Power Blast: Multipower, 50 Point Reserve

5u Standard Blast: EB 10d6

2u Ultra Blast: EB 10d6 (50 AP), Concentration (0 DCV, -1/2), Increased END Cost (x2 END, -1/2)

 

PLUS

 

25 EB +10d6 (50 AP), Concentration (0 DCV, -1/2), Increased END Cost (x2 END, -1/2), Can Only be Used with Ultra Blast slot (-0)

 

You pay 82 points, and can either use a 10d6 EB with no restrictions, or a 20d6 EB at 0 DCV for double END cost. You get the Power construct you want, and you pay the appropriate number of points for it.

In that case, why bother making it a Multipower at all? You could just buy the 25-point add-on, and pay less END. Then you've got a simple, partially-limited power. 100 Active, 75 Real. In my example, you're never using more than 50 Real points of power. Or using Hugh's example, which costs 8 points more than my/Smokeless Joe's original Multipower (and costs 1 END less), not the additional 50 or more points that would be required by the various suggested book-legal builds.

 

As I said on the previous thread on this topic, it may be a matter of rules philosophy: How tight a hold should the rules have for the sake of protection from abuse/unfairness/imbalance, as opposed to the GM taking responsibility? If a construct could be used fairly or unfairly, abusively or non-abusively, munchinly or for greater roleplaying creativity, should it be forbidden because someone might misuse it, or should it be allowed because someone might use it well?