Power Defense

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

So are you saying that, in heroic games at least, killing attacks should have OAF, Zero END, STR Min, Required Hands, Real Weapon, etc... figured into them as the base, and force characters with claws to buy Not A Focus (+1), No STR Minimum (+1/2)...etc?

Why no, that would be silly.

 

Why? In heroic games, you dont buy with cp weapons normally, so that would be unnecessary altogether.

 

If you for some reason need a cost in cp for the gun, there is usually a list of common guns with such math already figured out.

The approach you suggest doesn't seem very user friendly at all, as it makes a player sit down at creation and think up every single last possible sFX of adjustment powers in the game, and decide whether his character would be immune to them. Since thats not possible, and takes a relatively long time, most characters will only buy one or two forms of power defense, even if plenty of others are appropriate to their character.

Example: Fire Dude buys power defense vs. Fire/Heat based adjustments, cuz he's made of fire, dude, and also vs. Ice/Cold based ones, because it melts before it can affect him. He gets, say, 15 character points worth of each. During the game, the GM whips out a villain, The Flesh-Melter, and he uses a drain with the sFX "Your muscles turn to putty." Fire Dude doesn't have muscles, but because he failed to consider Flesh Melting as a sFX, the GM is faced with a few options:

1- Fire Dude is screwed, 'cuz he didn't buy the right version of power defense.

2- Let Fire Dude buy the power defense on the spot - course he might not have 15 character points laying around to buy it up to the level he should have it at (all his Power Def is of equal amount)

3- Handwave it, and say that Flesh-Melter's powers don't work on him, cuz, well, they shouldn't, dude. Now Fire Dude has power defense vs. his attacks for free.

None of these seem like very palatable options - Does anyone else have any? I'm sure I missed a lot of them, including "GM laughs evilly and taunts Fire Dude's player as he writhes in incongruent stupor and GM Lightning Bolts him for good measure," But I'm not really interested in non-serious ones like that.

As i said, at chargen the player can define the SFX his pow def works against or define it by the theme of his power defense and let that handle things. If his power defense was defined as "i am made of fire so things that wont affect fire wont affect me" then, well, honestly my first choice would be to ask "where is your desolid?" and note that being desolid will handle most attacks against him. Doesn't have flesh" seems much more a justification for desolid than for pow def.

 

Now, as Gm, how would i handle a case where "gee, i and the player missed an obvious sfx issue".. well for the "first time" it goes in favor of "what makes sense" under SFX... if it becomes something likely to keep coming up, he pays points for it.

 

Same way as you resolve other such issues in HERo when character write up clashes with sense.

 

No difference here.

 

Is it me or is everyone forgetting how to resolve issues in play suddenly?

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

So are you saying that, in heroic games at least, killing attacks should have OAF, Zero END, STR Min, Required Hands, Real Weapon, etc... figured into them as the base, and force characters with claws to buy Not A Focus (+1), No STR Minimum (+1/2)...etc?

Why no, that would be silly.

 

Why? In heroic games, you dont buy with cp weapons normally, so that would be unnecessary altogether.

 

If you for some reason need a cost in cp for the gun, there is usually a list of common guns with such math already figured out.

The approach you suggest doesn't seem very user friendly at all, as it makes a player sit down at creation and think up every single last possible sFX of adjustment powers in the game, and decide whether his character would be immune to them. Since thats not possible, and takes a relatively long time, most characters will only buy one or two forms of power defense, even if plenty of others are appropriate to their character.

Example: Fire Dude buys power defense vs. Fire/Heat based adjustments, cuz he's made of fire, dude, and also vs. Ice/Cold based ones, because it melts before it can affect him. He gets, say, 15 character points worth of each. During the game, the GM whips out a villain, The Flesh-Melter, and he uses a drain with the sFX "Your muscles turn to putty." Fire Dude doesn't have muscles, but because he failed to consider Flesh Melting as a sFX, the GM is faced with a few options:

1- Fire Dude is screwed, 'cuz he didn't buy the right version of power defense.

2- Let Fire Dude buy the power defense on the spot - course he might not have 15 character points laying around to buy it up to the level he should have it at (all his Power Def is of equal amount)

3- Handwave it, and say that Flesh-Melter's powers don't work on him, cuz, well, they shouldn't, dude. Now Fire Dude has power defense vs. his attacks for free.

None of these seem like very palatable options - Does anyone else have any? I'm sure I missed a lot of them, including "GM laughs evilly and taunts Fire Dude's player as he writhes in incongruent stupor and GM Lightning Bolts him for good measure," But I'm not really interested in non-serious ones like that.

As i said, at chargen the player can define the SFX his pow def works against or define it by the theme of his power defense and let that handle things. If his power defense was defined as "i am made of fire so things that wont affect fire wont affect me" then, well, honestly my first choice would be to ask "where is your desolid?" and note that being desolid will handle most attacks against him. Doesn't have flesh" seems much more a justification for desolid than for pow def.

 

Now, as Gm, how would i handle a case where "gee, i and the player missed an obvious sfx issue".. well for the "first time" it goes in favor of "what makes sense" under SFX... if it becomes something likely to keep coming up, he pays points for it.

 

Same way as you resolve other such issues in HERo when character write up clashes with sense.

 

No difference here.

 

Is it me or is everyone forgetting how to resolve issues in play suddenly?

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

Why on earth would you house rule that?

to make chargen easier and simpler for my players and cut down on unnecessary effort.

House Rules are at _best_ a necessary evil. Having one says that you think there is a flaw in the game as written that prevents you from playing the game you want to.

clearly we have a gross difference in how we see house rules.

 

I see house rules as the rpg equivalent of salt and pepper and catsup and cheese are to my burger. They are things i add to the generic product to make it suit my tastes better.

 

My salting my whaopper isn't saying the whopper is inedible... its saying I like mine with more salt. My house ruling how power defense is bought isn't saying its unplayable, but that the other way is more suited to my game.

 

Because otherwise, you are fixing what isn't broken... and that is by definition a bad idea.

there are more options in the 'verse than "leave it as is" and "fix whats broken" such as "well its Ok but lets make it more to what we like.."

You were claiming it's unrealistic or implausible for 'I'm really tough' to defend against everything power defense does.

 

Well, guess what? There's a lot of really unrealistic and implausible stuff, and if speedsters not killing themselves is genre - then really tough guys shrugging off everything because they're really tough and badass is equally genre.

the difference is i don't buy the "in for a penny in for a pound" argument. i dont think that because I or the campaign or the genre allows this "implausible thing" that means i have to allow any implausible thing. That way lies madness and the loss of genre feel.

 

In my ESP game, i might well allow psionic powers, even though they are illogical and implausible, but not allow "summoning demons." Thats just one example. i am sure you can find others.

 

Again, i am not one of the HERo types who feel playing hero means the player can buy anything. I believe running HERo is useful to let you define as Gm the world you are running.

Both ways require math figuring. And in creating arbitrary advantages, you step outside the list of explicitly allowed GM enforceable tweaks and begin to be playing a game that is not Hero.

Well first, i seem to think the HERo system encourages more serious changes than you do. I mean, I am creating an advatage set that applies to a minor defense power that mirrors an already existing set of advantages applied to similar powers and you start crying its no longer playing HERO.

 

Meanwhile i look in HERO 5 and see suggestions about dropping stun altogether.

 

So we have extremely different biews i think on how inclusive this gameer tollkit is meant to be.

 

but hey, if it turns out that steve long himself took out a full page ad to denounce me as "no longer playing hero" my response would be "yeah, you are right. i am playing my campaign. So what?"

 

Common point of reference, makes it easier to give advice and suggestions to fellow gamers, had more playtesters than your tweaks, likely had reasons that you don't actually know... the list goes on.

the only common frame of reference I need is between me and my players... and i handle that.

 

As for playtesters and reasons i dont know etc... not one of them playtested my game with my guys and my stories. I have a lot more experience with those things than they and i have been doing this a lot longer than most game designers nowadays... tho i do like the experience fanbase round here.

 

these things might be serious concerns to you and nudge you to shy away from using house rules... but they don't me.

 

Plus, if you don't tell someone about signfiicant house rules to a game, it can be a bit of a bait and switch.

and what if i shoot them with a bb gun without warning?

 

with the number of times in these posts i have mentioned the discussion between gm and player about this... i gotta imagine this nonsense about not telling about house rules was just an intentional slap.

 

thats fine but it points to little use in continuing much further.

The latter is _precisely_ my point. As a system default, neither is more common, so the simpler, less arbitrary system is superior. Having to buy it based on SFX as a default is more confusing, more subject to arbitrary GMs being a dick, and so forth.

we have already established that within the published rules a Gm can choose to make all his adjustment powers for his npcs NNDs or avlds if he wants to, and thus totally screw over WITHIN THE RULES players looking for universal defenses.

 

given that WITHIN the rules notion, I really find it odd to suggest that a Gm who sets up a system where he will be discussing in advance what the power defense applies to wiuth the player, sets a specific cost structure to reflect it, and so forth is more subject to Gm dicking over players.

 

it defies logic.

(Honestly, given what Hero specifically empowers a GM to do, I think it's just lazy to then change the rules - you could get the same effect without any changes - and if it is acceptable for a good GM to make changes, there's no way to stop a dickhead of a GM making stupid changes - they can point to the divine right of GMs).

uhh... a Gm can change any rule in his game. Thats true for good Gms and bad ones.

 

the player's counter point power or defense against sucky Gms changing the rules is to walk away.

 

if you are thinking the rules have any impact on the above... you are mistaken.

 

And making the problem _worse_ then becomes a good thing?

its not making the problem worse. power defense from campaign to campaign will have to be looked at and such... its the nature of the beast.

Then why the heck am I playing in said campaign?

presumably because it interests you and you find it fun. At least, thats why i play in campaigns.

What is the _point_ of using Hero if you can't use it to play the character you want?

you use hero to build the campaign you want.

within that campaign, you play the appropriate character you want.

 

if i show up for a fantasy hero game and want to play a powered armor space marine... i don't expect the Gm should allow it just becauses it is what i want and he is using the hero system.

 

If you end up playing something else, might as well play basic D&D by the rules.

 

you seem to be employing hyperbole a lot.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

Points (equal points or even very precisely calculated points) do not make balance happen in play. Instead, balance in play is what shows the points and costs were appropriate.

 

 

Incidently, why are you increasing the cost of Power Defense?

 

(The whole have to pay extra points to get the utility of by the book Power Defense [both universal, and limited versions] issue has not been answered)

since everyone in such a campaign uses the same rules, since no one gets by the book pow def there isn't a balance issue per se. They ont be being compared to other character in other campaigns who bought power defense at the book cost and come up lacking.

 

If you aren't making it more expensive, you are in fact playing by the book, but cosmetically flipping it around to make it quicker on the players, which is different from a rules change that actually alters the function... although still seems like a complete and utter waste of time and energy.

actually the amount of points spent on power defense in practice will maintain more or less the same amount. Its just that most everyone's pow def will be limited to appropriate to sfx applications.

If you are... then you affect game balance.

 

game balance in play is determined fundamentally not by point cost as much as it is determined by the challenges the Gm chooses. I know if i charge X for a given trait, I can make that trait prove to be worth X in play, or at the very least close enough to not be an issue.

 

So, this might worry some Gms but not me,

 

the play proves the points, not the other way around.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

Points (equal points or even very precisely calculated points) do not make balance happen in play. Instead, balance in play is what shows the points and costs were appropriate.

 

 

Incidently, why are you increasing the cost of Power Defense?

 

(The whole have to pay extra points to get the utility of by the book Power Defense [both universal, and limited versions] issue has not been answered)

since everyone in such a campaign uses the same rules, since no one gets by the book pow def there isn't a balance issue per se. They ont be being compared to other character in other campaigns who bought power defense at the book cost and come up lacking.

 

If you aren't making it more expensive, you are in fact playing by the book, but cosmetically flipping it around to make it quicker on the players, which is different from a rules change that actually alters the function... although still seems like a complete and utter waste of time and energy.

actually the amount of points spent on power defense in practice will maintain more or less the same amount. Its just that most everyone's pow def will be limited to appropriate to sfx applications.

If you are... then you affect game balance.

 

game balance in play is determined fundamentally not by point cost as much as it is determined by the challenges the Gm chooses. I know if i charge X for a given trait, I can make that trait prove to be worth X in play, or at the very least close enough to not be an issue.

 

So, this might worry some Gms but not me,

 

the play proves the points, not the other way around.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

If something truly cannot be done with Hero, then Hero is not truly universal.

while this may be futile, you might want to think about the difference between "something cannot be done in hero" and "something cannot be done in a campaign (ie is not permitted)" and "something can be done better with changes".

 

For example: in a cyberpunbk game, i would break up the computer skill into a variety of sub-skills... because the computer skill would see a lot jmore use and play a much bigger role than in the "default" HERo scale. Also, by doing so, i add precision and detail that would be inappropriate for say an ESPer game or a James Bond spy game but is wonderful and rich for a cyberpunk one.

 

 

That is _far_ more serious than something petty like an overcosted or undercosted power or characteristic.

 

Only if one puts a lot of weight into the (IMO false) notion that HERo is intended to be used emphasizing the RAW and without any significant Gm alterations. I think HERO is written to rely on and depends on and with expectations that the Gm will play a bigger role in the design, use and choice of rules for his campaign than many actual game systems.

 

HERO ism after all, a tollkit, not an actual game.

 

and you know, while it does have problems, HERo IMO is not nearly as fragile as you seem to indicate you think it is.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

 

while this may be futile, you might want to think about the difference between "something cannot be done in hero" and "something cannot be done in a campaign (ie is not permitted)" and "something can be done better with changes".

 

For example: in a cyberpunbk game, i would break up the computer skill into a variety of sub-skills... because the computer skill would see a lot jmore use and play a much bigger role than in the "default" HERo scale. Also, by doing so, i add precision and detail that would be inappropriate for say an ESPer game or a James Bond spy game but is wonderful and rich for a cyberpunk one.

 

 

 

 

Only if one puts a lot of weight into the (IMO false) notion that HERo is intended to be used emphasizing the RAW and without any significant Gm alterations. I think HERO is written to rely on and depends on and with expectations that the Gm will play a bigger role in the design, use and choice of rules for his campaign than many actual game systems.

 

HERO ism after all, a tollkit, not an actual game.

 

and you know, while it does have problems, HERo IMO is not nearly as fragile as you seem to indicate you think it is.

 

There are already rules for adding skills. The 'background' skills, to be precise.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

 

uhh... a Gm can change any rule in his game. Thats true for good Gms and bad ones.

 

the player's counter point power or defense against sucky Gms changing the rules is to walk away.

 

if you are thinking the rules have any impact on the above... you are mistaken.

 

I don't like that approach. I think things would be better if GMs did _not_ think they can 'fix' the rules themselves.

 

 

I like to be able to cleanly filter out the bad GMs by how much they like to house rule.

 

I've seen a lot of house rules. Ones that change the cost of things just don't make the game better. They just don't. They simply... exist.

 

If you're any good, you don't need to house rule. If you're bad, it won't save you. And if you're bad and hubristic, then you'll change things despite it not actually making things any better.

 

 

Throw away the shackles. Stop obsessing on rules minutia and just be a good GM.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Power Defense

 

Posts...too...long. Awkward...format. Can't...make...myself...read....

 

Hope I didn't miss anything really interesting. Sorry for the William Shatner moment.

[CBikle]

Re: Power Defense

 

Posts...too...long. Awkward...format. Can't...make...myself...read....

 

Hope I didn't miss anything really interesting. Sorry for the William Shatner moment.

 

"I'm a rock-it-man..."

 

[Lucius]

Re: Power Defense

 

Okay, at this point I no longer know what we're talking about.

 

LA

p

[nexus]

Re: Power Defense

 

Apparently that House Rules are innately evil things... as far I can tell.

[David Johnston]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

game balance in play is determined fundamentally not by point cost as much as it is determined by the challenges the Gm chooses. I know if i charge X for a given trait, I can make that trait prove to be worth X in play, or at the very least close enough to not be an issue.

Reminds me of the guy who made the mistake of getting skill at tasting poison in another game system. So naturally people started trying to poison him. Just him. They didn't try to poison the other characters.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

I don't like that approach. I think things would be better if GMs did _not_ think they can 'fix' the rules themselves.

 

I like to be able to cleanly filter out the bad GMs by how much they like to house rule.

Wel in my experience its the opposite. the best Gms have all had house rules and the worst GMs frequently had few or were the proud "we play by the book" types.

 

I certainly wouldn't use "house rules" as a identifier of good/bad GMing as much tho.

 

We definitely have different backgrounds on this.

I've seen a lot of house rules. Ones that change the cost of things just don't make the game better. They just don't. They simply... exist.

Again, my experience says the opposite. Traits value depends on the types of challenges that are presented. In a fantasy game set on atlantis, where there is lots of water action, water breathing and swimming are mo0re valuable than in a supers game where the campaign doesn't feature much water action at all. Cost is supposed to relate to effectiveness.

 

EDIT: I really recommend you reread chapter 7, which goes into just how flexible the hero system intended to be and see the litany of changes they discuss a lot more severe than changing the cost of power defense. IIRC, might be wrong, i think they even discuss raising the cost of primary characteristics, which i think most people would see as much bigger than the power defense issue.

 

Of course, within a range of value I can work things fine, as frequency and importance is more or less my control, but the context of the campaign does set the bounds a mite.

 

So when a Gm says "because of the nature of the campaign, this trait now costs x instead of what the book says" right off the bat, i see a Gm who is doing what HERo suggests... using the toolkit to build the campaign he wishes.

If you're any good, you don't need to house rule. If you're bad, it won't save you. And if you're bad and hubristic, then you'll change things despite it not actually making things any better.

i wonder how you would classify Gms who don't even use a published game system and just design their own to meet their campaign needs?

Throw away the shackles. Stop obsessing on rules minutia and just be a good GM.

 

We have definitely reached the end of constructive discourse i figure.

 

enjoy your games.

[David Johnston]

Re: Power Defense

 

Apparently that House Rules are innately evil things... as far I can tell.

By no means. But this house rule either increases the cost of power defense to far higher than the utility of the power or it makes buying power defense of even more dubious utility. Either way, the result is "people stop buying power defense". Not many people ever bought it in the first place even without nerfing it.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

By no means. But this house rule either increases the cost of power defense to far higher than the utility of the power or it makes buying power defense of even more dubious utility. Either way' date=' the result is "people stop buying power defense". Not many people ever bought it in the first place even without nerfing it.[/quote']

 

So, just curious, how exactly did you arrive at the determination of the "utility of the power" or that it reached "dubious utility" without any specific knowledge of the campaign, or of the frequency of adjustment powers in play in the campaign the house rules is applied to?

 

isn't the utility of the power directly tied to the specifics of the campaign?

 

Were you hiding under my cvouch during my last hero-5 campaign, you sneaky fellow? :-)

[David Johnston]

Re: Power Defense

 

So, just curious, how exactly did you arrive at the determination of the "utility of the power" or that it reached "dubious utility" without any specific knowledge of the campaign,

 

The same way any player does when he's creating a character for a campaign he hasn't played in, yet. Based on what the GM tells him as he's creating the character. In this case the GM is telling me that I am going to be facing a variety of possible transform special effects but it's only really practical for me to protect myself against some of them. To which my response is, "Thanks. I think I'll use those points to buy up my Body, instead."

[nexus]

Re: Power Defense

 

By no means. But this house rule either increases the cost of power defense to far higher than the utility of the power or it makes buying power defense of even more dubious utility. Either way' date=' the result is "people stop buying power defense". Not many people ever bought it in the first place even without nerfing it.[/quote']

 

I was speaking of the ongoing back and fourth between WhammeWhamme and tseuji with statements like this

 

If you're any good, you don't need to house rule. If you're bad, it won't save you. And if you're bad and hubristic, then you'll change things despite it not actually making things any better.

 

Throw away the shackles. Stop obsessing on rules minutia and just be a good GM.

 

[David Johnston]

Re: Power Defense

 

I was speaking of the ongoing back and fourth between WhammeWhamme and tseuji with statements like this

 

OK, admittedly I wasn't reading WhammeWhamme. And I do have a house rule in this regard (that changing to a more common defense is free for anyone who wants to do it).

[schir1964]

Re: Power Defense

 

I've stayed out of this since I have struggled over the inconsistencies of Adjustment Powers for a long time.

 

WhammeWhammes claim that "House Rules" are some type of indicator of a "Bad GM" is really out there. It puts him in direct opposition of Steve Long who rewrote the rules of Hero to be more in line with his own "House Rules" for his campaigns.

 

I could be wrong on this and please correct me if I am, but didn't the Ultimate Martial Artist start out as house rules for someone's campaign? Maybe it didn't, but I'm sure that before any published rules were available that many people created house rules for handling Martial Arts maneuvers and such.

 

Also, Steve Long encourages GM's to make "House Rules" for thier campaigns. Just start reading the posts under "Hero System 5th Edition Rules Questions" and you find many times where Steve Long suggests that the GM make a House Rule to cover something that the rules specifically don't allow or handle well.

 

I can only conclude that WhammeWhamme would consider Steve Long a "Bad GM" since he uses "House Rules" for his own campaigns. Of course he has the ability to put those "House Rules" into the supplements and possibly the 6th Edition of the Hero rules.

 

I will not comment on any details of the Adjustment Powers or Power Defense since I already have threads that have done that. I'm more interested in getting a more consistent system that has more flexibility than the current rules for Adjustment Powers. It just might make more sense also. (8^D)

 

tesuji,

I understand your quest to find something to make the system better. If you want, I can email you some possible ideas that might help you to attain the proper feel for your campaign.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Power Defense

 

So, just curious, how exactly did you arrive at the determination of the "utility of the power" or that it reached "dubious utility" without any specific knowledge of the campaign, or of the frequency of adjustment powers in play in the campaign the house rules is applied to?

 

isn't the utility of the power directly tied to the specifics of the campaign?

 

"By default" power defense will protect the charaxcter against all negative adjustment powers and all transforms, etc. at the cost of 1 character point per point of power defense. "Tesuji Special" power defense will protect against such powers of only one specific SFX at the cost of 1 character point per point of power defense. To obtain the exact same utility of one point of "By default" power defense using "Tesuji Special: power defense will cost 3 character points. Thus, the cost has tripled. If the cost is tripled, the "per unit" utility of Power Defense has fallen to 1/3 of its previous value.

 

In other words, if the cost of 15 points of defenses now obtains only 5 points of defenses, utility has been reduced.

 

To your earlier comment of "making it easier for the players", this could be accomplished by setting your default power defense definition, then adding "Each character point spent on such Power Defense acquires 3 points of Power Defense." The same advantages will now get unlimited Power Defense to 1 point per, where it was previously.

 

My dislike for the theory stems from the simple fact that, even if "one SFX only" power defense is a -2 limitation (which is way more than the default for, say, one SFX energy defense) there are way more than three SFX for such attacks out there. As such, the utility of "limited defense" is pretty limited in most games. Now, if your games feature the premise that there are only three possible SFX for Adjustment Powers (other than those which are NND, or AVLD, or otherwise not affected by Power Defense), and these three SFX are equally common, paying 1/3 the cost of unlimited power defense for limited power defense seems a lot more reasonable. Most games, however, lack such finely tuned SFX frequencies.

 

Similarly, most games allow without qualm that most characters have "no limitation" defenses of other forms, such as Energy Defense. Why is FlameMan's ED so high? Because cold and fire have limited impact on him. Oh? Why does he enjoy a resistance to radiation, electricity, sonics, blaster fire, light beams, etc. etc. etc.? Like your prior example, it seems he should simply have been Desolid instead - he's resistant to such a huge number of attack forms and he has a flame body, after all. In fact, it sounds like a large proportion of Supers characters, who have high resistance to so many attack forms, should be Desolid instead.

 

Now, yuour comment that:

 

game balance in play is determined fundamentally not by point cost as much as it is determined by the challenges the Gm chooses. I know if i charge X for a given trait' date=' I can make that trait prove to be worth X in play, or at the very least close enough to not be an issue.[/quote']

 

is a seemingly easy answer. Presumably, this means that, if one character takes 15 Power Defense: Flesh Melting Attacks, suddenly flesh melting attacks will become far more common to showcase that character's exotic defense. Let's assume four more players, each of whom buys 15 points of power defense against a different special effect, so we now have five SFX, all of which need to show up fairly frequently to support their value. This, in turn, means numerous characters against whom four of the five characters are defenseless. They would have been far better off to decide, in advance, that none of them would buy Power Defense in any form. That way, there won't be a constant deluge of Adjustment Powers to which most of the characters are defenseless.

 

Thinking on it, one game option which would be interesting would be to trash ALL the defenses - no PD, ED, Power Defense, Flash Defense or Mental Defense. Instead, you buy defenses against SFX. 15 points "Fire/Heat" defense would act as PD against a physical LavaBolt, ED against a flamethrower, Power Defense against a Heatstroke stun drain, Flash Defense against blinding flames (or an AVLD fire attack) and Mental Defense against the Hypnmotic Candle. It would be a full defense against any NND fitting the effects.

 

But, again, it would mean predefining the SFX in the game, and either equalizing them or adjusting the various defense costs to ensure some modicum of equivalent utility. And it would mean violating one of the core Hero principals (IMO) - that mechanics and SFX are separate.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

"By default" power defense will protect the charaxcter against all negative adjustment powers and all transforms, etc. at the cost of 1 character point per point of power defense. "Tesuji Special" power defense will protect against such powers of only one specific SFX at the cost of 1 character point per point of power defense. To obtain the exact same utility of one point of "By default" power defense using "Tesuji Special: power defense will cost 3 character points. Thus, the cost has tripled. If the cost is tripled, the "per unit" utility of Power Defense has fallen to 1/3 of its previous value.

 

In other words, if the cost of 15 points of defenses now obtains only 5 points of defenses, utility has been reduced.

or, put another way, power defense won't protect against all sfx by default, which is of course the definition for the house rule. You just spent a lot more time saying it.

 

None of which gets you to the "conclusions" I questioned in the text you quoted, of the utility of the power vs its cost or dunious utility, etc. For that, you need another piece of data, the frequency of powers affected by power defense and their significance in the encounters of the campaign.

 

hence my question.

To your earlier comment of "making it easier for the players", this could be accomplished by setting your default power defense definition, then adding "Each character point spent on such Power Defense acquires 3 points of Power Defense." The same advantages will now get unlimited Power Defense to 1 point per, where it was previously.

i really dont follow this.

My dislike for the theory stems from the simple fact that, even if "one SFX only" power defense is a -2 limitation (which is way more than the default for, say, one SFX energy defense) there are way more than three SFX for such attacks out there.

i dont think the HERo system uses -2 to represent 1 in 3 odds of use. I am pretty sure i recall activation rolls being more like -2 for 81 which is 1 in 4 at least.

As such, the utility of "limited defense" is pretty limited in most games. Now, if your games feature the premise that there are only three possible SFX for Adjustment Powers (other than those which are NND, or AVLD, or otherwise not affected by Power Defense), and these three SFX are equally common, paying 1/3 the cost of unlimited power defense for limited power defense seems a lot more reasonable. Most games, however, lack such finely tuned SFX frequencies.

and similarly, does every hero campaign feature exactly equal distributions between attacks which go against PD compared to those which go against ED? Likely not.

 

but they survive anyway.

 

Similarly, most games allow without qualm that most characters have "no limitation" defenses of other forms, such as Energy Defense. Why is FlameMan's ED so high? Because cold and fire have limited impact on him. Oh? Why does he enjoy a resistance to radiation, electricity, sonics, blaster fire, light beams, etc. etc. etc.? Like your prior example, it seems he should simply have been Desolid instead - he's resistant to such a huge number of attack forms and he has a flame body, after all. In fact, it sounds like a large proportion of Supers characters, who have high resistance to so many attack forms, should be Desolid instead.

actually, i didn't suggest he be desolid because he is resistant to so many attack forms, but because he was sescribed as not having flesh and muscle and being made of fire. it might ought to be "not able to pass thru sealed barriers" but it really sounded like a good description of a desolid guy to me.

 

shouldn't a guy like that be able to pass thru a set of bars?

is a seemingly easy answer. Presumably, this means that, if one character takes 15 Power Defense: Flesh Melting Attacks, suddenly flesh melting attacks will become far more common to showcase that character's exotic defense. Let's assume four more players, each of whom buys 15 points of power defense against a different special effect, so we now have five SFX, all of which need to show up fairly frequently to support their value. This, in turn, means numerous characters against whom four of the five characters are defenseless. They would have been far better off to decide, in advance, that none of them would buy Power Defense in any form. That way, there won't be a constant deluge of Adjustment Powers to which most of the characters are defenseless.

you, of course as it is the internet, take it to an extreme but in effect you are right in some points.

 

If a character takes "vulnerable to gravitics"... then i will put in enemies and challenges which feature gravitics. It will likely show up more often than it would if no character took gravitics related traits.

 

if a character takes "4d6 RKA damage shield only to break swords" then i will throw into the enemies and challenges guys with swrods. They will likely show up more than they would had no one taken specific sword-breaker powers.

 

if a character takes "ckill computers 16-" then i will put in compuiter skill related challenges. it will likely appear more than had no one taken any computer skill.

 

Absolutely and unapologetically.. yes on all those charges and many many more cases.

 

and yes, if someone takes "power defense: hard to alter" then i will throw in enemies and challenges with adjustment powers which clash into that defense and make it applicable. it might even be more than had no one taken any power defense against this type.

 

As for being better off by taling none? even allowing for the extremity of internet, thats off. would you think that if none of them bought ED they wouldn't have problems with it?

 

Again the premise of the issue stems from thw wide range of things adjustment powers are used to represent. Its going to be the case that you will encounter them. I cannot conceive of running a supers game where some use of adjustment powers did not occur. By buying the power defense of limited sort, you might actually increase the frequency of occurance a little but the ones that occur will be more likely to be of the types you have defense against.

 

Thinking on it, one game option which would be interesting would be to trash ALL the defenses - no PD, ED, Power Defense, Flash Defense or Mental Defense. Instead, you buy defenses against SFX. 15 points "Fire/Heat" defense would act as PD against a physical LavaBolt, ED against a flamethrower, Power Defense against a Heatstroke stun drain, Flash Defense against blinding flames (or an AVLD fire attack) and Mental Defense against the Hypnmotic Candle. It would be a full defense against any NND fitting the effects.

indeed. that could work, but it is a much bigger change, perhaps with better payoff, than just tweaking power defense.

But, again, it would mean predefining the SFX in the game, and either equalizing them or adjusting the various defense costs to ensure some modicum of equivalent utility. And it would mean violating one of the core Hero principals (IMO) - that mechanics and SFX are separate.

or as a whacky alternative, instead of relying on points for all that balancing, allow the GM to handle it. As in, setup a section telling the GM more about selecting and designing challenges based on the PC traits. It wouldn't be focused on "is fire/heat" as even as "ice/cold" as even as "life drain/necromancy" BEFORE play begins, but instead be about IN PLAY actually having "ice/cold", "fire/heat" and "undead/necromancy" occur as challenges relatively evenly in frequency-x-severity (AKA even in risk or threat) because your three players took those three traits to the same level more or less.

 

But that gets back to my original point which is that utility and balance IN PLAY doesn't come from the points but comes from the challenges and threats the Gm CHOOSES to send at his players. Those choices make the points seem right or seem wrong. HERo spends a whole lot of time worrying fretting and ciphering over the former, over the points... and seems to spend a whole ot less time on the choices that make the points work or fail to work.

 

You poke fun at the SFX defense notion and dismiss it it seems because it means all that up front point gnashing to make each catergory figure out even BEFORE PLAY. In fact tho, just a little time spent talking about IN PLAY balancing could make that system work fairly well i would think.

 

but then again, I am weird. :-)

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

tesuji,

I understand your quest to find something to make the system better. If you want, I can email you some possible ideas that might help you to attain the proper feel for your campaign.

- Christopher Mullins

 

thanks chris but frankly, i have been doing this since about 82. I have been managing to get the proper feel for my campaigns for a while now.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

BTW, for those interested in following up on the game breaking and universe destabilizing and domino-toppling danger of my "one special effect then add more at +1/4 and add all SFX for +2" and ponder the impossibility of using this kind of thing in HERo games and how it means predefining all SFX before hand and its not three and it violates a core princple of HERo and forces cats and dogs to sleep together...

 

Pages 112 in HERO 5-er has a deatil write up for adjustment powers of the advantage called... wait for it... its real end of the world stuff...

 

Variable Effect: multiple special effects

 

it basically allows adjustment powers to be bought to affect two SFX for +1/2, add additional SFX for +1 it can affect four SFX, or all SFX for +2.

 

Its hard to figure how +2 can be right for all SFX if there are more than three SFX?

 

i will have to ponder

 

Hey? Another thought, does this make my rule for power defense not a house rule but merely an extension of an existing rule and thus its Ok now, no longer intrinsically evil?

 

or does the fact that my option provides specifci costs for 3 sfx, 5 sfx etc and not just 1, 2, 4, and all as the book rule still leave me in the land of evil bad GMs?

 

more pondering.

[David Johnston]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

Hey? Another thought, does this make my rule for power defense not a house rule

.

 

 

No. Attacks are not bought in the exact same way as defenses and do not work in the same way as defenses. Defenses do not affect attacks. They are affected by attacks. That's why you roll dice for the attack damage, and not for the defense subtraction. Adjustment powers always allowed you to affect more than special effect as an advantage although the details have changed over editions. Power Defense always subtracted from all adjustment powers regardless of special effect unless you got it with a limitation.