Just because I feel like it

[JmOz]

Okay, as most of you know, I like to point out weird rules issues and debate them, so now I will do it again...

 

This time it is about Foci, and what makes on obvious or inobvious

 

I will use as an example a James Bond type "Blaster Pen"

 

8d6 EB, 4 charges, *AF

 

As immagined once it is fired it is obvious that the blast is coming from the pen, but while it is sitting there it looks like a normal pen, is it IAF or OAF?

[Monolith]

A Focus is Obvious if it is obvious that the power comes from it. From that point you must factor in learned knowledge about an item. For example, if you have never seen a pistol before you have no idea what it does, but once you see it fired you know what that pistol does. You have learned that the metal thing shoots bullets. That same effect needs to be applied to everything. If you see Dark Seraph flapping in, and you have no idea who he is, you might just thing he is a villain with wings. But once you see the crown on his head start glowing when he casts his magic spells you get the idea pretty fast. If Dark Seraph used no magic in the encounter the character would have no idea that his crown was a mystic focus. Once he uses the magic you have "learned" what his crown does.

[Citizen Keen]

But I think JmOz has a good point: The pen is not some random shaped object we have never seen before. We have preconcieved notions of what a pen-shaped object does - it marks surfaces, staining them with ink. In desperate situations, it can be used as 1 pip HKA. But as a blaster, or sleepgas releasing agent? That's not obvious. I still think it should be Obvious, but I can see the other side's viewpoint.

 

-cK

[tesuji]

OK so looking at some other examples... compound foci...

 

I have a magic sword. It cuts real guud for 3d6 HKA. thats an obvious focus.

 

Now the same sword can also throw lightning bolts on command (3d6 rka) and heal me on command (9d6 healing healing option or 41/2d6 if i remember the alternative healing wrong.) Neither of these two abilities is OBVIOUSLY a part of the sword. Someone 100' in the air who did not think i could fly up to them would never dream of attacking my sword... as he might if i had a bow in hand.

 

Other example: OIF powered armor dude wears his suit of battledress. Sure his armor is OIF after all you can see he has steel hard exterior. Sure you can probably even surmise it is air tight, unless you see holes. What about his immunity to radiation? What about his autodoc which injects healing drugs into him when he is hurt? What about his Radio hearing?

 

What about a sword cane?

[Monolith]

Originally posted by Citizen Keen

But as a blaster, or sleepgas releasing agent? That's not obvious. I still think it should be Obvious, but I can see the other side's viewpoint.

It is obvious once it is used though, and that is the point of an Obvious Focus. Once you see that pen in use you "learn" that it has another effect besides just writing. Superman's cape does nothing, Batman's cap can be used as a shield, Dr. Strange's cap has all types of power. If all three characters appeared in front of you would you know the difference? No. They would all just appear to be capes, until you see Batman use his as a shield and you see Dr. Strange use his as a a flying device. Then you learn that all capes are not created equal.

[JmOz]

To muddy the waters:

 

Fred says that It would be OAF

 

BUT

 

UMA say IAF...

[TheEmerged]

Personally, being the Rule Geek that I am, I sometimes make use of a "Concelable Obvious Accessible" level for -3/4. This gives the player a chance to make a Concealment roll to hide the object when not in use.

[TaxiMan]

I'd say the pen is OAF, but it also has it's own Disguise skill. If you make a PER roll that overcomes the Disguise, you recognize it's a blaster made to LOOK like a pen. Of course, once it is used, the Disguise is blown.

[JmOz]

Taximan, that is an interesting idea, you could also use a version of "shapechange" for the same effect

[BlackCobra]

Well the character I'm currently playing in the only Hero/Champions campaign our group is playing (small whine) completely relates to this quetsion, so here's how my GM and I reasoned things.

 

All the Black Tiger's major gadgets are very James Bond-themed. He has a pen camera, his belt does swinging, he has smoke-buttons, and recently he got the fabled magnetic watch.

 

All of these are IAF, Inobvious Accessible foci. Our reasoning was that each of these objects really does whatever it's supposed to do (the pen writes, the belt holds up his pants, the buttons keep his shirt on), but it also can do these other things (swinging, editic memory, darkness). Sure the power is obvious once you use it, but the object always remains what it looks like (generally speaking). However, because they are something he takes out and uses, they can be knocked out of his hand.

 

Now this Inobvious thing has several advantages. When he's in his tux (IIF armor), his pen, his inhalor (self-contained breathing) and all his other neat little gadgets are likely to be overlooked if he's searched for various things like guns or "gadgets". The villain or his agents are going to have to know him pretty well before they start taking EVERYTHING away from him. They still might -- jail will always be kind of a pain, since they insist on really emptying pockets.

 

However, the Inobvious thing also has some downsides -- if he accidentally lends his pen to someone and forgets to get it back (or gets back the wrong one), he's going to have some trouble with his Secret ID. Or if he drops his acyteline-torch lighter (which looks just like any other lighter) and someone picks it up...

 

This reasoning may not work for everyone. But I think the focus rules are flexible enough to handle any situation.

 

(Amusing side-note, the watch actually doesn't work because, in typical me fashion, I forgot to buy him Absolute Time Sense on the thing. You get what you pay for in Hero.)

[Derek Hiemforth]

There should probably be a way to differentiate between a Focus that's obvious all the time, and one that's obvious only when it's in use. Trouble is, you run into cultural issues.

 

For example, a handgun is always obvious when used. If you shoot somebody, it's clear that the little thingy in your hand that went boom with a flash and a cloud of smoke was responsible.

 

And in our society, it's also obvious when not in use. Virtually everyone knows what a gun looks like, will know that they should take it from you if searching you for weapons, etc. But in, say, an alien culture or a primitive culture, it wouldn't be obvious that a gun was a weapon when it wasn't being used.

 

Perhaps it might be worth an extra -1/4 Limitation if the function of an Obvious Focus is also obvious to the prevailing culture in the campaign, even when the Focus was not in use. (Or you could rule that it was obvious in that manner by default, and apply -1/4 less Limitation if it wasn't, etc.)

[Snarf]

If a deceptive item can be given disguise skill, then maybe a concealably small item could be given concealment skill with -2 (only usable with this item). Or at least give a bonus to anyone using concealment skill with them.

 

Implementing that change would require modifying almost every piece of equipment in the game...

[Enforcer84]

Well, I'd probably go with UMA on this one as a concealed weapon is considered an IAF. Just because one person has seen you shoot someone with the pen doesn't mean that the next guy will know. Sure, the first guy knows its a Sword/Cane, but I don't see any ruling that encountering an Inobvious Focus a second time makes you believe its a cane again.

Heck, if you fought him once before you might assume its a sword cane and he shoots you with a cane-gun. You still thought it was a sword...

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

I'd go with the Disguise skill; shapechanging for the object is just too farking expensive. After all, if you know what you're looking for... Consider also the fact that you can buy disguise/concealment for bases.

 

• Concealment: hard to find, but when you uncover it, 'damn, yeah, that's a base all right.'
  
• Disguise: Even when you've found it, you may not know what it is: 'Okay, so what's this old house doing out here in the middle of nowhere??'
  

 

If it's still a pen in its off hours (heh), give it a Disguise skill -- applicably with OAF. Therefore, your blaster pen might look like this:

 

Blaster Pen: Package

a) 6d6 EB (30 actives), OAF Universal Breakable (-1), 15 Points.

Disguise, 15- (15 Actives), OAF Universal Breakable (-1): 7 Points.

 

Your 'cool hidden blaster pen' works like a pen, writes like a pen, but click-click, you can go *ZAP* with it. To spot it as being a Weapon instead of a Pen, you have to beat its Disguise in a contested roll. (I seem to recall that objects have a base skill roll of 9-, so that's what I used.)

[Snarf]

Except it couldn't disguise itself as anything; it could only look like pen. That sounds like another limitation on disguise.

[jtelson]

I think I would consider it an OAF. One of the examples of obviousness is a magic ring that glows when it is used. Naturally the inobvious examples include a blaster built into a glove so it really is just a judgment call. Just as a general rules call if it's obvious when you use it it's obvious otherwise not so much.

[JmOz]

On the disguise Idea:

 

I would say the base foci lim

 

-1 Foci only (Technacly the skill would be for the person w/o this)

 

-1 Pen only (in other words it is ONE disguise)

[Yamo]

Hmm.

 

Might I (tactfully, I hope) suggest that this might be a little bit of a silly thing to get anal about?

 

The Focus is Obvious. If you see things shot out of the pen, you know where they came from. That's the very definition of an Obvious Focus.

 

Maybe you can't tell that the pen can shoot things before you see it, but so what? Does that really need to be accounted for in a rules sense and affect the value of the Limitation?

 

I would argue no. No unless you also pay points for keyboards and mice on your Computers or indoor plumbing for your Bases. Not every tiny thing needs to involve the rules! Just try writing up complete game stats for a towel one of these days if you don't believe that. It has Stretching, Flash, Transform (wet to dry) and many other Powers. It's also completely ridiculous.

[Kintara]

Well, I'd agree Yamo. Of course, if it's not a big deal, and a case could be made for it being Inobvious, then it still isn't a big deal. But I do agree that the Disguise thing comes off as too particular (which I what I'm assuming you mean).

 

Anyway, Yamo, that towel thing sounds like a good idea for a thread. Someone throws out random normal stuff, say a bed, and the next poster stats it out in extensive detail.

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Originally posted by Yamo

Just try writing up complete game stats for a towel one of these days if you don't believe that. It has Stretching, Flash, Transform (wet to dry) and many other Powers. It's also completely ridiculous.

 

That depends on whether or not you're hitchhiking your way across the galaxy, now, doesn't it?

[Snarf]

I think the level of conceability in a focus could occasionally be useful information, such as in places where everyone is searched for weapons, but I've never been willing to do the work rquired to simulate things like that.

 

Actually, It sounds lke you could make a great superhero with all those towel powers. I'll call him either towel-master or the towel-inator.

 

Someone throws out random normal stuff, say a bed, and the next poster stats it out in extensive detail.

The Gameboy Advance SP. Is it the images power in a focus? A computer? A light source?

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Originally posted by Snarf

Actually, It sounds lke you could make a great superhero with all those towel powers. I'll call him either towel-master or the towel-inator.

You didn't get the hitchhiker reference, did you?

[Snarf]

Of course I got it. Everyone got it. I must've read all 5 of those books an average of 3 times each. That doesn't change the towel master's awesome destructive power.

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Next character creation challenge: The Hitchhiker. Remember, he needs to have loads of Streetwise, PRE-defense, and probably a couple things for Cramming AKs....

[Snarf]

How about Universal Translator with err maybe inobvious, inaccesible, fishy focus -1/4.

 

I don't why I didn't notice this before, but a cane gun is given as an example of an inobvious focus. I suppose a pen-gun is also supposed to be merely inobvious and have nothing else.