Tunneling Question.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

How many characters (vehicles, etc) with Tunneling have you seen, who did NOT have an associated attack power that represented the same power if turned on a living thing/vehicle/etc? It's often in a multipower.

 

 

Of those without some associated attack power, how many would have made a lot more sense if they had?

 

My character Carnelian has Tunnelling with no associated attack power to make holes in things, and it wouldn't make sense for him to have such a Power. Then again, his Tunnelling is bought as "fills in" and is defines as 'flying through stone' (also bought, only through stone). It was easier than buying Desol and Affects Physical World on all his other Powers.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Yeah. Your classic D&D-type earth elemental should, it seems, be able to move through earth or stone without disturbing them. Shouldn't need Desolidification for that.

 

Tunneling really isn't the ability to put holes in things. It is the ability for you to move through things. Heck, it could have more the SFX of making the material itself phase out of reality (temporarily), even though some of the more literal-minded of people might try to call that some kind of UAA Desolidification. Maybe it could be defined as some kind of, "teleport," that must cross the intervening space and is blocked by a certain DEF value, for that matter ("I don't go through the stone; I send my dimensional lifeline through").

 

It's just that somehow Tunneling can have the side effect of leaving a hole in things, which we tend to associate with damaging them. Maybe that's what the problem is: if you can both go through a material and leave a hole, it should be bought with a linked Attack Power (or at the very least in the same manner as a Teleport Gate).

[Lucius]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Moles' date=' rabbits and earthworms, among others, are associated with the ability to tunnel, but not the ability to cause vast damage to living creatures. Of course, their tunnelling DEF is pretty low..[/quote']

 

True. And having seen wounds inflicted by rabbits, I could see giving them a 1 damage class killing attack.

 

 

All this must be leading up to the conclusion that we can ditch most forms of movement in favour of limited Tunnelling, right? [Only through air; only through water; etc.]

 

It must? Why?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Ruminating on a palindromedary

[Vurbal]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Yeah. Your classic D&D-type earth elemental should, it seems, be able to move through earth or stone without disturbing them. Shouldn't need Desolidification for that.

 

Tunneling really isn't the ability to put holes in things. It is the ability for you to move through things. Heck, it could have more the SFX of making the material itself phase out of reality (temporarily), even though some of the more literal-minded of people might try to call that some kind of UAA Desolidification. Maybe it could be defined as some kind of, "teleport," that must cross the intervening space and is blocked by a certain DEF value, for that matter ("I don't go through the stone; I send my dimensional lifeline through").

 

It's just that somehow Tunneling can have the side effect of leaving a hole in things, which we tend to associate with damaging them. Maybe that's what the problem is: if you can both go through a material and leave a hole, it should be bought with a linked Attack Power (or at the very least in the same manner as a Teleport Gate).

I agree. Tunneling creates holes as a by-product of moving through some substance. If nothing is being moved then there's no tunneling going on. If the SFX allows for creating the hole without the movement then addtional powers should be purchased to represent that in game terms. If the character doesn't have other powers but it makes sense within the SFX to be able to create the hole without movement I might allow it once or twice, but would definitely require other powers to be bought if it was going to happen more than that.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

I agree. Tunneling creates holes as a by-product of moving through some substance. If nothing is being moved then there's no tunneling going on. If the SFX allows for creating the hole without the movement then addtional powers should be purchased to represent that in game terms. If the character doesn't have other powers but it makes sense within the SFX to be able to create the hole without movement I might allow it once or twice' date=' but would definitely require other powers to be bought if it was going to happen more than that.[/quote']

Actually what I was saying is that Tunneling itself should maybe not leave holes at all. It should be defined purely as moving the character through a material. If you want to leave the hole, you'd then have to link the Tunneling to an Attack Power.

 

Perhaps in that case Tunneling can have the clause that an Attack Power to which it is Linked doesn't have to buy Continuous/Area of Effect/Damage Shield/whatever to act on the material through which you travel; as long as the Attack Power is activated in the Phase and overcomes the materials' DEF (and perhaps it can be considered Standard Effect even if the Attack Power when used against a target normally is not), it acts on every hex through which you move with Tunneling. Although it is a minor exception, it is one that would really serve to keep this kind of build a lot simpler.

[Vurbal]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Actually what I was saying is that Tunneling itself should maybe not leave holes at all. It should be defined purely as moving the character through a material. If you want to leave the hole' date=' you'd [i']then[/i] have to link the Tunneling to an Attack Power.

 

Perhaps in that case Tunneling can have the clause that an Attack Power to which it is Linked doesn't have to buy Continuous/Area of Effect/Damage Shield/whatever to act on the material through which you travel; as long as the Attack Power is activated in the Phase and overcomes the materials' DEF (and perhaps it can be considered Standard Effect even if the Attack Power when used against a target normally is not), it acts on every hex through which you move with Tunneling. Although it is a minor exception, it is one that would really serve to keep this kind of build a lot simpler.

Interesting. At first glance I really like this. It removes some strange side effects of tunneling like putting holes in things without using an attack power and not being able to tunnel through certain things because you can't put holes in them without an attack power.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Actually, then, why not just use the Side Effects limitation...?

[prestidigitator]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Actually' date=' then, why not just [u']use[/u] the Side Effects limitation...?

Because it is a side effect in the more traditional sense of the word: a byproduct; a change in the environment that is not necessary for the functioning of the power (but is also not directly harmful to the user of the power). As we have been discussing, it is beneficial to the character at least as often (if not more so) than it is detrimantal. Therefore the Side Effects Limitation is not all that appropriate. If you really want to have a lasting effect on the medium through which you move, pay for it (by buying a HKA, RKA, Transform, whatever). As often as not, it will not actually cost extra points because the character will already have some kind of HKA or whatever, so placing Linked on the Tunneling will actually save a few points. In the end the movement will wind up costing more End, but that's probably a relatively minor issue most times.

[BoneDaddy]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Pardon my thread necromancy, but...

 

I've been toying with this idea myself, and I have a few thoughts.

 

The brick trick, super strength smash through, sets precedent for using Tunneling to break things man made things like walls and doors. Heck, it's components certainly imply damage, since you have to determine the DEF through which your hero can tunnel.

 

Smashing through a door in a house doesn't seem too different from smashing through a door on a car. Smashing through the door on an airplane in flight or a submarine at depth has pretty serious consequences. Smashing through an airlock door is ill-advised at best. All of these are possible, according to the super strength smash through.

 

So, either tunneling causes damage, or the machina has to wheel the deus on down pretty quickly anytime one of the above incidents occurs. I think gameplay would be hindered, to say the least, if the GM says "Sorry, hulk-thrax may be strong enough to smash through a reinforced steel door in a building, but the door on this airplane is simply too tough for him."

 

Logically, I believe that I (and others) have established with certainty that Tunneling causes a change to the environment which may have logical consequences (call it damage if you want, but it isn't an attack, and no BODY or STUN damage is done directly.) Why not cause that environmental change at a distance? Because the character doesn't move anywhere? Easy enough: Only to put holes in things (-1/4) or Character need not move (+1/2).

 

You know, we could always model it with Transform, but that goes for everything.

 

I can't see a pragmatic argument why Tunneling can't be ranged. Blame the design of the power and the game mechanics, but the consequences are logical enough, IMHO. It could be unbalancing in certain circumstances, and I think a GM would have to be careful about whether and how it was used in a campaign.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Hello.

 

Erm, ranged tunnelling?

 

That would not allow you to put holes in things at range, it would allow you to travel through things at range, and as you calearly cannot be travelling through things when you are not thgere to travel through them I don't see how you can apply the advantage, certainly not in that way (possibly if you bought it as 'useable as attack...)

 

There are two problems here though.

 

First off this is a gestalt power - it allows movement through solid objects by damaging them. I've previously argued that tunnelling should be an advantage for attack powers to solve this very quandry. That idea's full of holes though...

 

Second this is what you get if you start with the mechanics, build something, then step back and see what you've got. What you need to do is decide what you want, then build it: doesn't really work the other way around.

 

Tunnelling is clearly only meant to be used against stuff that doesn't really matter. You can not apply 'logic' to the application fo the mechanics otherwise you clearly could cause damage witht eh power: you can tunnel through steel with your Throbmoanium claws, but forgot to buy a HKA, so can't hurt Joe Normal with them?

 

Silliness.

 

Buy a MP with tunnelling and an RKA and a HKA. Make sure that you can not tunnel through a higher DEF than you can damage. In fact I'd limit the tunelling DEF to 62% of the maximum damage of your killing attack. You know, being logical about it.

[TaxiMan]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

I'd say that Tunneling should be firmly relegated to a Movement power, and the Brick Trick errata-ed. The super-strength smash through power construct is a mistake.

 

 

 

(From now on, please assume that anything I or anyone else writes, lacking a cited reference, includes the phrase "in my opinion".)

[Lucius]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

 

Second this is what you get if you start with the mechanics, build something, then step back and see what you've got. What you need to do is decide what you want, then build it: doesn't really work the other way around.

 

 

It is?

 

I thought this was what happenned when someone wanted to put tunnels in walls and whatnot at range, and so bought Ranged Tunneling.

 

What makes you think it was a case of someone putting advantages on powers willy-nilly to see what they do, rather than someone who wanted a certain effect ("put holes in that stuff over there" as I put it earlier) and thought (mistakenly, you'd say; and I don't disagree) that this was the way to do it?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Using a palindromedary at range

[schir1964]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

I had a thread about this and various solutions, but I think it was on the old threads. Drat!

 

- Christopher Mullins

[BoneDaddy]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

What makes you think it was a case of someone putting advantages on powers willy-nilly to see what they do, rather than someone who wanted a certain effect ("put holes in that stuff over there" as I put it earlier) and thought (mistakenly, you'd say; and I don't disagree) that this was the way to do it?

This is my case. My character is a blaster with a hell of a plasma generator attack multipower. The idea is this - shoot a hole in a wall, surprise the bejesus outof the bad guys on the other side of said wall. It's a super strength smash through, but ranged. Easy enough? A one hex AOE no knockback RKA to do the same damn thing would cost scads of points, and accomplish very little - I already have two RKAs with this framework, and a third one just to punch precise holes in things seems excessive, unnecessary, and most importantly, inelegant. A good framework should be robust and elegant. Ranged tunneling accomplishes that aesthetic goal of mine.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

First off no offence meant to the concept originator: my phrasing could have been far better and more considered.

 

My problem is that tunnelling is a movement power, not a putting holes in things power.

 

Now I can see that being able to take a wall out (and as a movement action not an attack action) is an enormously useful thing to do, but that in itself seems like a problem to me - the usefulness is really out of proportion to the cost.

 

Now if I was going to allow this, I'd require that it be built as an attack. Tunnelling, ranged, useable as attack.

 

This accomplishes two things: 1. it becomes an attack so you can't blow through a wall and attack what is on the other side in a single action unless you are using AoEs and

2. it makes the cost more realistic.

 

One other option I'd allow would be an indirect attack, that could pass through barriers that had less BODY+DEF than the attack, sfx being that it leaves a hole. I know this is something for nothing but I don't care. If you could have blown a hole in the wall anyway then the cost of indirect pays for the added utility. Or something.

 

To be honest blowing quite big holes through walls is not really a problem in Hero so I do not feel it needs a very creative solution.

[incrdbil]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

good necromancy--its a subject I stil find interesting. I've gone in favor of preserving the tunneling-ranged build, since although its a movement power, the function of the power is to make a tunnel (whihc is a hole) in something. For Vehicles--if its big enough that a tunnel could go through it and not collapse it,(not a normal bike, but a giant Robot thats as tall as a skyscraper) then I'm going to allow the usage.

 

Damaging components in the wall is a special effect situation. If the right up of a situation notes that certain equipment is built in the walls, and someone tunnels through it--the stuff gets destroyed (unless its so powerful thats its innate defense is higher than the DEF the tunneler can move through).

 

Here's a though for a house rule: anyone think that buying DEF as hardened would be ok in making a barrier of some sort 'tunnel proof'? Or have increase the DEF value vs the tunneling by some factor (50 % per level)?

[schir1964]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Here's a thought for a house rule: anyone think that buying DEF as hardened would be ok in making a barrier of some sort 'tunnel proof'?

Well let's see, Hardened is specifically designed to cancel out Armor Piercing, Penetrating, and Teleport.

 

You could add Tunneling onto the list, but that would mean that it should be canceled out by applying one of those advantages, or perhaps a new advantage of some sort.

 

Or have increase the DEF value vs the tunneling by some factor (50 % per level)?

This makes more sense. However, what I would do is simply rule that for every level of Hardened, the time required for the Tunneling is bumped up the Time Chart.

Half Phase Tunneling = Full Phase

Full Phase Tunneling = Turn

 

Or something like that.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Rapier]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

This is a classic that keeps coming back!

 

The problem is that you are talking about two disctinct Powers that are identical SFXes.

 

Analogously, you have a hand axe (1d6 HKA). You want to throw that hand axe, which is pretty normal for a hand-axe. The SFX is exactly the same. The problem comes in converting that same SFX into two different Powers in Hero. So you build it as an MP with an ultra 1d6 HKA attack and an ultra 2d6 RKA with lockout.

 

This is the same situation you are talking about here. Same SFX but two different powers. You have a big laser driller. The main effect of the driller is to create a hole to move through. Thats your Tunneling. The secondary effect is 'what happens if something steps in the way?' That's an RKA. It point expenditure isn't even that much of a difference. It might cost you a couple extra points for the second slot, but it will give you exactly what you are looking for.

[incrdbil]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

You could add Tunneling onto the list, but that would mean that it should be canceled out by applying one of those advantages, or perhaps a new advantage of some sort.

 

Well, I guess you could make tunneling armor piercing...not sure if I like that.

[BoneDaddy]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Well' date=' I guess you could make tunneling armor piercing...not sure if I like that.[/quote']

I did that initially, but the practical effect of the armor piercing is the halve the value of the DEF of an object, so armor piercing tunneling doubles the effectiveness of the power for half again as many points.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

I did that initially' date=' but the practical effect of the armor piercing is the halve the value of the DEF of an object, so armor piercing tunneling doubles the effectiveness of the power for half again as many points.[/quote']

 

It only doubles the defense one can penetrate, and not the distance that can be travelled, and some materials, presumably, will be Hardened and thus cannot have their defenses halved by this mechanism. From that perspective, adding half the cost may appear more reasonable,

[schir1964]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Well' date=' I guess you could make tunneling armor piercing...not sure if I like that.[/quote']

How about this?

 

Armor Piercing on Tunneling allows you to travel twice the number inches through DEF that you can travel through normally.

 

Hardened cancels this.

Furthermore, every level of halves the number of inches you can travel.

If the inches are reduced to 1/2 Inch, then it takes double the time used.

If the inches are reduced to 1/3 Inch, then it takes triple the time used, etc...

 

- Christopher Mullins

[TaxiMan]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

If an RKA to open a hole in a wall costs more than Ranged Tunneling UUA to do the same thing, I think the Hero metarule is to use the RKA.

 

If the AP of the RKA is too high, then how will a character justify his character having that level of power?

 

Example: If you can "blow a hole" in an 9 DEF 9 BODY wall with a single shot, do you have a 5d6 RKA? 5d6 RKA averages 18 BODY, same as the Tunneling. True, you could say a perfect 3d6 RKA can do 18 BODY, but the Tunneling build works 100% of the time.

 

If you can reliably destroy 18 BODY worth of inanimate objects, why can't you dish out that damage vs. villians? Do you have a Psych Lim: Berserk vs. Walls?

 

I apologize for the snippy tone of the above, it isn't meant that way but I don't have the time right now to rewrite it tactfully. If your co-players & GM are happy with the build, enjoy!

 

Looking at it as a rules-only question, the Ranged Tunneling UUA just looks wrong. There is a cleaner, more consistent way to do it - the only problem is, it costs more.

[schir1964]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

Taximan, I would really like you comments on my thread "New Skill: Tunneling Maneuver" if you get some extra time. Curious as to you opinon on that thread. Hope to see you there.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Lucius]

Re: Tunneling Question.

 

I did that initially' date=' but the practical effect of the armor piercing is the halve the value of the DEF of an object, so armor piercing tunneling doubles the effectiveness of the power for half again as many points.[/quote']

 

Yah, but

 

1) only once (stacking does nothing except negate Hardened) and

 

2) without improving speed.

 

In fact, if I recall you can buy up DEF seperately from inches of movement anyway, can't you?

 

I'm not sure using Armor Piercing is that much cheaper - not that I'm suggesting using it anyway.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Using Extradimensional Ranged Tunneling on a Palindromedary