Power Defense

[Dust Raven]

Re: Power Defense

 

it isn't necessarily true...

 

Again working along similar lines to how adjustment powers are defined now consider...

 

POWER DEFENSE: in this game power defense applies at its base level only against one SFX or definable range of effects. For example: resistant to magic might be appropriate.

 

For +1/2 you can add a second SFX/range of effects.

For each additional +1/4 you add another

At +2 it affects all sfx/range of effects.

Which is a fix for a fix and creates a loop that signifies, for me, that the original fix was a mistake. If Power Defense as it's presented in the rules should cost 3x what's listed for a particular game, then it's cost should just be increased and use the standard battery of Limitation to create limited versions of it. At least that's how I'd do it if I ran a game where Power Defense should cost more than it normally does.

getting to this several points...

 

yes, as i stated long ago, one solution to power defense is to just change how you write up the attacks. No argument there.

 

First, what i don't get is why the "there must be universal power defense to reflect cosmic tough guys" aren't just as upset about that. Why is it Ok for cosmic dude to be "rendered impotent" because the Gm wrote the adjustment power asnan NND bypassing the power defense altogether?

Because the attack's effect is something that cosmic dude has no defense against. Maybe the effect is an airborn virus that nearly instantly, though temporarily, causes muscle tissue to freeze in place (or maybe it's superstrong nanites that just perform a really nasty grab from the inside). This is something the GM doesn't think Power Defense should apply to because it doesn't actually cause a change in the target of any kind. So it's bought as a Drain STR NND vs Self Contained Breathing or having no muscle tissue to grab. That's what NND is for and how it should be used. And who knows, maybe cosmic dude does have Self-Contained breathing; he is cosmic after all.

 

Second, why is it better to change the way the adjustment powers work and leave power defense "as written" than to change power defense and leave adjustment powers as written?

I'm not suggesting any rules be changed, just the builds using those rules can be done in a way that achieves the desired effect (wihout a house rule).

 

to me it comes down to this... which way of doing it results in less funky math and bookeeping.

 

if i leave power defense as universal and decide to handle it on the adjustment power end, I end up doing a lot more funky write-ups as adjustment powers are used a lot more than universal power defense is.

 

on the other hand, if i change power defense to be by default SFX and range of effect dependent, i get the same kinds of effects with much less writing and ciphering.

I disagree. You still have to do the extra math and bookeeping because you are changing the rules. This is even more of a hastle because you need to make sure all of your players know about the change and how it affects how they make their characters. It's definately not less though. If you for some reason are going to ignore all the Power Defense that's been bought and build all Adustent-type Powers using NND, you might as well just say no one can buy Power Defense and do absolutely no bookkeeping.

 

As for effects, again, just because its an adjustment power doesn't mean it is AFFECTING the target.

 

In fantasy hero there way the force field spell which reflected animlas throwing themselves in the way of oncoming attacks, taking some of the effect before it hit you.

 

Consider the sister to that spell called "the harrying swarm" where the effect is that hoardes of animlas do that very thing against attacks coming from a given guy. So flame boy throws his firebolt and a bird and a possum jump into the path, blunting the effect before it hits whoever it is targetted at. No mater who he throws his fire bolts at, some pesky rabbit will leap into the way, taking a few dice off the attack.

 

Game wise, that should be IMo a suppress vs the attack powers.

Sounds like a FF or FW with Feedback to me. I'm not familiar with the spell you describe because I don't have Fantasy Hero, but I'd probably build it as FF AOE (any area) UAA. Power Defense isn't even applied here. If the mage casting the spell had to counter each attack in turn (rather than it being automatic while he did other things), it's easily Missile Deflection (saying that anyone closing to HTH range is too close to their target for the self sacrificing squirrel to get in the way). Power Defense isn't involved here either. In fact, I can't really think of a way to build this that uses a Power that Power Defense would affect (the Suppress you suggest just seems way not the right Power; Summon hoard of self-sacrifcing animals would be tons closer and still be wrong).

 

Or consider a water weather guy who can suck electircal current in and so he maintains a area around him where electrical effects are reduced... you throw your electrivcal bolt into this area and i leech off some juice, resulting in a less powerful bolt hitting your target.

 

should your power defense apply?

Should this somehow be reflected by me writing up the power as "no defense against it at all"?

or should your power defense be subjected to "within reason of SFX" and be simply disallowed from applying here?

A Suppress Field, as an option described in the book (and an example concerning magic is even given), I'm not sure the Power Defense of the originator of any affected Power would even apply. Off the top of my head, I'd say if the effect originated outside the field and the GM has rules that such effects are affected, then the Power Defense of the originator (if any) doesn't apply against the Suppress. If it does originate in the area, then Power Defense would apply normally. Does this make sense? Sure; the electrokinetic is able to overcome the electrical suppression field and launch his attack through it (wholly or partially, depending on how much Power Defense he has), but only if he's close enough (within the field) to feel it's effects and react to them.

 

If i say "power defense may be disallowed due to sfx" as defult i dont have to write and cipher squat.

 

its more user friendly.

 

IMO

Neither do I, and I don't even have to say that.

[Dust Raven]

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.

 

Um... yeah. I don't think I'm gonna go back and read everything between tesuji's post I replied to and now. If I missed anything important, someone PM me with a link. Otherwise I'll just try and keep up with the here and now, or the now and later, or something...

[prestidigitator]

Re: Power Defense

 

In retrospect perhaps I should have replied a more constructively myself. How's this:

 

If you are going to restrict players in this fashion (preventing them from buying a Defense that protects against all SFX of a given set of Powers), consider giving them something in return, like giving them a Defense Power that works against all attacks of the specified SFX, whether those attacks would normally applied to PD, MD, FD, PowD, or whatever.

 

IIRC Fantasy Hero's Magic Defense works like this: it acts as all types of mechanical Defenses, but only against magic. I might have that wrong though. It's been a while.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

Sounds like a FF or FW with Feedback to me. I'm not familiar with the spell you describe because I don't have Fantasy Hero, but I'd probably build it as FF AOE (any area) UAA. Power Defense isn't even applied here. If the mage casting the spell had to counter each attack in turn (rather than it being automatic while he did other things), it's easily Missile Deflection (saying that anyone closing to HTH range is too close to their target for the self sacrificing squirrel to get in the way). Power Defense isn't involved here either. In fact, I can't really think of a way to build this that uses a Power that Power Defense would affect (the Suppress you suggest just seems way not the right Power; Summon hoard of self-sacrifcing animals would be tons closer and still be wrong).

 

Sorry but this seems to be very far stretching.

 

the result of the power is that attacks from the target are partially blocked and not as effective, cause less damage.

 

That as an EFFECt in game terms is a suppress or drain vs those attack powers, which removes some of the power of the attack. That is quite easy and direct to model.

 

Whether the cause of the loss is animals thwoing themselves into the path, power being leeched off into the exultant crystal shard or LKHLHHGF, or a cold zone that saps heat from the fire attacks is SFX.

 

Your alternatives are far more complex to build to duplicate the effect that the suppress power already does.

 

force wall of course, fails because it gets knocked down by powerful enough attacks and thus wont be around. Also if it doesn't get knocked down, nothing gets thru. it affects everything both ways, not just from the one target. finally, it also impedes movement, which wasn't part of the spell (assuming it affects PD and wasn't transparent.)

 

As for force field AOE UAA... after noting how complex the build is, i will also note the expense is rather off. By the time you add in exotic defense t cover attacks other than those directly affecting PD and ED (like say his flashy fireball type ranged AOE flash) you have gone way out into weird hero build...

 

all to avoid using the power which "reduces the power level" to create the effect which "reduces the power level" because it somehow seems the totally wrong power?

 

Not getting it myself, but if it works for you, if thats how you do things routinely in your games, thats cool. After all, i am not one of your players, so it wont bother me any.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

Which is a fix for a fix and creates a loop that signifies' date=' for me, that the original fix was a mistake. [/quote']

 

which would be a mistake.

 

this isn't a change, just spelled out explicitly for those who didn't understand that when i said in my first post to this thead "One solution would be to house rule thaT pow def as written applies to a single SFX of effects and allow them to buy additional SFX using the usual scheme for adjustment powers." I actually meant what I siad.

 

See, by not reading that, by not looking at the rules for adjustment powers and seeing that it doesn't make it impossible to buy universal defense, some were able to trump up the "this means i cannot build anyone with universal defense" counter-arguments.

 

this isn't a fix to a fix. It was always there. It was just conveniently ignored by those who wanted to fabricate an invalid argument against it.

 

of course, by explicitly spelling it out, since some didn't get it, now i get the opening of the "see the first was a mistake" lines.

 

Whats next? i get accused of being a flip-flopper?

 

:-)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Power Defense

 

or' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

What you aren't hearing, apparently, is that your approach to changing the default from "all powers" to "one SFX" ALSO effectively triples the cost by making Universal Power Defense cost three times what it does under the default system.

 

None of which gets you to the "conclusions" I questioned in the text you quoted' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

So how many times do you need to revise a character for Tesuji's game? Assume Player 1 comes to you and says "My character is vulnerable to flesh melting adjustment powers. How common are those?" Assuming you even alow that as a disad, I suspect it's rare. But then Player 2 shows up with 15 points of Power Defense: Flesh Melting Powers. Gee, Flesh Melting just became a lot more common. Call up Player 1 and tell him the new value of his disad. But Player 2 can't get his character concept to work, so he scraps it and makes a new character. Call Player 1 and tell him he needs another disad againm, I guess.

 

Meanwhile, Player 3 has independently decided to make a character whose SFX is "Flesh Melting"...

 

i really dont follow this.

 

That's why I often say things "using a lot more words" when I post with you

 

I am simply saying that, if you apply your house rule with the provision that "1 SFX Power Defense" (now the default) costs 1 CP per 3 points of defense, you return the costs to the default (or at least return the cost of 1 Universal Pow Def to 1 point). IOW, it is possible to implement your mechanic, fairly easily, without changing the relative cost of universal Power Defense.

 

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.

 

First off, you created the -2. You indicated a +2 advantage would make Limited Power Defense (LPD) universal. Logically, then, a -2 Limitation would get unioversal power defense (UPD) back to 1 SFX. If UPD = 3x LPD, then LPD = 1/3 UPD.

 

Second, yes, 8- works marginally over 25% of the time (one time in four).

 

and similarly' date=' does every hero campaign feature exactly equal distributions between attacks which go against PD compared to those which go against ED? Likely not. [/quote']

 

Where they don't, however, the general result is that the weak sister defense sees a lot less use. Look at Pulp Hero characters. I haven't, but my guess is that PD is more commonly raised, and by more, than ED. Why? PD is more useful. Similarly, in most games, everyone buys PD, ED and resistant defenses. Those attacks are too common to have no defense. BUt not everyone buys FLash Defense, Power Defense and/or Mental Defense. Less common usage = less utility = less points invested.

 

Make power defense further restricted, and less characters purchase it. Eventually, "less" becomes "none".

 

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.

 

"Hey, guys - if no one takes any noncombat skills, we can all bhuild combat monsters and Tesuji will only toss combat encounters our way. No need to waste points on any exotic defenses either - if we don't have them, he won't spotlight them." Again, an obvious extreme, and it does imply min/max'ing players, so it won't be an issue in all games.

 

But does that really mean you won't throw a challenge at your players unless something on their character sheet allows them an easy solution? In my games, players expect challenges they may be ill-equipped to deal with, which must be solved by use of brainpower, not character points. I suspect the same applies in your games.

 

Does this work in reverse, by the way? Can I take "2x STUN from bullets" at 10 points, such that guns will become far less common in your game? Seems a good way of reducing gunfights in a Pulp Hero game.

 

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

 

Based on your comments that you tailor the challenges to what your characters do, and do not, purchase, I'd say yes. But that's only part of the story.

 

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' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

But that my teamates lack any defense against. Even the densest of villains generally figures out he should focus his attacks on the guy vulnerable to his powers, not the one with a swack of defenses against it. How often does the Mentalist target the opposing Mentalist, rather than the Brick?

 

indeed. that could work' date=' but it is a much bigger change, perhaps with better payoff, than just tweaking power defense.[/quote']

 

Definitely. But, as Dust Raven comments above, it would give sdomething back, not just take some utility away.

 

or as a whacky alternative' date=' instead of relying on points for all that balancing, allow the GM to handle it.[/quote']

 

hen why have any point values for power defense? If the players buy Universal for 1:1, and Flesh Melting Only for 1:1, can't the GM balance that? Again, an extreme, but if you rely 100% on the GM to balance the game, you should not need point totals at all.

 

As in' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

Do you let players tell you the frequency of such items as vulnerability and susceptibility, then tailor the game to match, or do you tell them how frequently such items will arise in play? IOW, if Player 1 takes 2x STun from solar powered cold weapons weilded by green froglike martians as a 30 point disad (nb: other than the 30 points, we had a player toss this on a character to see the GM's reaction...) does your game become "Attack of the green froglike martians weilding solar powered cold weapons"? [Hammer Attackls by Octogenarian Norwegian Architects was on there as well, IIRC] Or do you tell the player to set the points at a more appropriate level (such as nil in these extremes)?

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

What you aren't hearing, apparently, is that your approach to changing the default from "all powers" to "one SFX" ALSO effectively triples the cost by making Universal Power Defense cost three times what it does under the default system.

hugh, there is a significant difference between "not believing X is a problem" and "not hearing X"

 

I get that it changes the cost from that in the book. I just don't consider changing costs from that printed in the book to be a problem. An items VALUE in a given campaign may be in sync with the book, in which case keeping with the book is the best choice, or it may be different, in which case keeping the book price may be the worst choice.

 

I long long ago got over the erroneous belief that the printed rule/cost/nechanic had some holy "this is the right way and the best way" objective property.

So how many times do you need to revise a character for Tesuji's game?

usually there is the pre-game discussions about character, concept, background and such, then I tend to allow players to make substantial revisions in the first three-four sessions, but after that the character is pretty much locked down and the good stories begin. Those first three-four sessions are usually somewhat generic and action driven to give the players still forming notions about their characters time to "work the kinks out" before we start getting into the more "directly tied to the PC story" adventures and plots which would become problematic if major changes occur in character.

 

So far, that has worked very well.

 

How do you do it?

Assume Player 1 comes to you and says "My character is vulnerable to flesh melting adjustment powers. How common are those?" Assuming you even alow that as a disad, I suspect it's rare. But then Player 2 shows up with 15 points of Power Defense: Flesh Melting Powers. Gee, Flesh Melting just became a lot more common. Call up Player 1 and tell him the new value of his disad. But Player 2 can't get his character concept to work, so he scraps it and makes a new character. Call Player 1 and tell him he needs another disad againm, I guess.

Hugh, is this just a "hey its interent so lets be contentious" kind of thing or do you actually not get this?

 

As long used as an example in HERO chargen discussions, the value of a limitation such as "only in intense magnetic fields" WILL HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT whether or not your teammate generates strong magnetic fields... so, in fact, there might come times when one player's character writeup necessitates a change in another character's values, since the new info alters the true effectiveness.

 

this did not suddenly spring into being as an issue when tesuji started GMing, though, the two may have been comtemporaneous since i started GMing hero back in the 82 time frame.

 

Other examples can easily be figured in using the normal system... for example, one character takes vuln to mental powers at a "frequent level". Another character takes hunted by mentlist family superteam at 14-. thus the frequency of the gang running into mentalist foes has in effect increased.

 

Now, to some degree, this can still be handled in script. If its just one member of a supervillain who is the SFX in question, he can simply concentrate on his preferred enemy and not shoot at the other guy so much as to skew the vulnerability. (This is akin to the again ALREADY ESTABLISHED HERO CONCEPTS like having one guys shield never get stolen, never seem to break while another guys shield has those issues frequently because ONE PLAYER TOOK THE FOCUS LIM on his character and got the points and another didn't.)

 

Again, all these is already well established HERO notions on dealing with these things, not sudden problems arising anew to threaten all HERODOM because "tesuji is GMing wrong."

 

I am stunned someone with your experience wouldn't have seen this already?

 

That's why I often say things "using a lot more words" when I post with you

nice shot. lesson learned.

I am simply saying that, if you apply your house rule with the provision that "1 SFX Power Defense" (now the default) costs 1 CP per 3 points of defense, you return the costs to the default (or at least return the cost of 1 Universal Pow Def to 1 point). IOW, it is possible to implement your mechanic, fairly easily, without changing the relative cost of universal Power Defense.

gotcha... i thought that was what you were saying.

I like the other version better, but, were i to find the new version somehow out of whack price wise, your suggestion would certainly be considered.

First off, you created the -2.

You are incorrect . Perhaps simply uninformed.

 

HERo 5er page 112 lists the advantages for adding more SFX to adjustment powers. It lists the following...

 

+1/4 for one SFX

+1/2 for two SFX

+1 for four SFX

+2 for all SFX

 

My power defense variant lists the following...

+0 for one SFX

+1/2 for two SFX

+1/4 more for each additional SFX

thus +1 for four SFX

+2 for all SFX

 

My scale follows almost exactly what PUBLISHED HERO says in terms of adding SFX. The differences are, drawing perhaps from 5e or 4e more than 5er, I break it down by 1/4 rather than just going to the simplified +1 for 3-4.

 

But as far as inventing the +2 value for going to all SFX... thats dead spot on taken from HERO rules in core rulebook.

 

its one of the costs I think he got more or less right

You indicated a +2 advantage would make Limited Power Defense (LPD) universal.

analogous to HERo 5er page 112, yes, i did.

Make power defense further restricted, and less characters purchase it. Eventually, "less" becomes "none".

IMX people tend to purchase traits they think will be needed in the game they are to run.

 

People don't buy ED in Pulp HERo because they don't think they will see it used.

 

As long as my players think their pow def will get used, they will buy it. So far, its been easy enough to convince them of that.

 

but really, this gets back to the players understanding and trusting that their Gm will make their traits they spend the hard to come by Cp on see use. My guys understand its much less "will my power defense vs physical trauma get used" but rather "if ai buy this trait, it will play a role". My player's learn and i try to tell them: this is about your characters, so your traits will matter.

 

So that whole notion of "maybe this won't be worth anything, utility down to zero, but it costs points" is a total non-issue for my games.

 

"Hey, guys - if no one takes any noncombat skills, we can all bhuild combat monsters and Tesuji will only toss combat encounters our way. No need to waste points on any exotic defenses either - if we don't have them, he won't spotlight them." Again, an obvious extreme, and it does imply min/max'ing players, so it won't be an issue in all games.

first off, characters are still subject to approval and all combat monsters might not be appropriate for the game i am leaning towards. usually i can be flexible but... there are limits. Besdies , its rare for me to approve characters with no non-combat skills.

 

But more to the point. lets say they did meet to pul this stunt. It would be fairly obvious but i would stop and ask "hey guys, if you want all combat campaign, no need to play sneaky behind the back take-advantage-of-tesuji stunts. Just tell me. if you are all in agreement that you want a slugfest campaign like in the old days with less of my sneaky underhanded stuff as plots, just talk to me. be upfront. After all, we all trust each other here. No need for silly sophmoric "secret deals" and such, right, we work together."

 

However, as all my players know and are aware of, your character's traits include his weaknesses and lacks. A brick character with no ranged combat and no flight isn't going to get to encounter only hand-to-hand guys. Sometimes his trait of being "short ranged grounder" will have the drawbacks show up too.

 

Again, nothing really new or earth shattering here, just simple GMing 101, or maybe 102.

 

reiterate my shock at you not already knowing this, bein' you been at this a while.

 

But does that really mean you won't throw a challenge at your players unless something on their character sheet allows them an easy solution? In my games, players expect challenges they may be ill-equipped to deal with, which must be solved by use of brainpower, not character points. I suspect the same applies in your games.

ahhh maybe you do have some idea of it then.

Does this work in reverse, by the way? Can I take "2x STUN from bullets" at 10 points, such that guns will become far less common in your game? Seems a good way of reducing gunfights in a Pulp Hero game.

if i aloowed it, it would reduce the gunfire directed at your character. you might be the one to draw the sword wielding madmen instead of the gun bunny. or maybe this gives me, in the month of "warm-up sessions", cause to introduce as a manir villan adversary a group of sword wielding types, thereby reducing the number and frequency of gun-threat encounters, to handle as much as ai can your choice to have guns not be a frequent issue for your character.

Based on your comments that you tailor the challenges to what your characters do, and do not, purchase, I'd say yes. But that's only part of the story.

then you don't understand. As i have said and repeated, this does not have to go to the "internet posting extreme" in actual play. A character's weakness or lack is a "trait" and will also get its time on stage. One purpose of the challenges is to highlight the character traits of the stars and show them as important elements.

 

But that my teamates lack any defense against. Even the densest of villains generally figures out he should focus his attacks on the guy vulnerable to his powers, not the one with a swack of defenses against it. How often does the Mentalist target the opposing Mentalist, rather than the Brick?

that depends on his motivations and how important it is to take them down. All things are not equal in those regards, especially when story elements and drives are in partial determined by the players.

 

Of course, i could be after the mentalist and still be mentally going after the brick, as a mind controlled brick can do wonderful things for me.

 

Definitely. But, as Dust Raven comments above, it would give sdomething back, not just take some utility away.

indeed.

hen why have any point values for power defense? If the players buy Universal for 1:1, and Flesh Melting Only for 1:1, can't the GM balance that? Again, an extreme, but if you rely 100% on the GM to balance the game, you should not need point totals at all.

as stated earlier, the script balance works within bouncd. one of the outside the bounds is the exact case you mentioned, where A does everything B does EXACTLY and also does more... for the same cost. That usually cannot be balanced script-wise and is am example of broken design getting in the way.

 

for things to work, each element needs to have give and take over other elements of the same cost, tradeoffs. The example you give is an example of no-tradeoff, and so it defines reasonable balancing by script... well mostly defies. Lets just say it makes it tougher since i cannot throw a situation at universal that he would be worse at than limited would be, using those traits.

 

Interestingly, i see that kind of thing happen most often in point buy games than in class or other "pre-fabbed package" games. It seems like when someone puts together and playtests a class/package, attention is given to the tradeoffs, DnD being one most egregious example. But in point buy systems, its not uncommon for one guy to be able to get "everything" the other guy has and yet have more. usually this is an example of "better system fu" at work, rather than just a simple egregious design flaw like you suggest.

Do you let players tell you the frequency of such items as vulnerability and susceptibility, then tailor the game to match, or do you tell them how frequently such items will arise in play?

mnostly, i let them tell me, within reasonable parameters. if you choose fire power at infrequent, then for the campaign other villains will be more common and the fire guys come at you only once in a while. If you choose very common, then the plots will involve more fire based guys, maybe DEMOn starts calling down fire from the heavens and fire demons become a common threat you have to deal with.

 

your choices, within reason, guide my selection of stories and plots, just like you choosing to play a mentalist does, or your decision to make your character a religious type, or a science guy helps me plot out the themes and flavors of things you will have to face.

 

IOW, if Player 1 takes 2x STun from solar powered cold weapons weilded by green froglike martians as a 30 point disad (nb: other than the 30 points, we had a player toss this on a character to see the GM's reaction...) does your game become "Attack of the green froglike martians weilding solar powered cold weapons"? [Hammer Attackls by Octogenarian Norwegian Architects was on there as well, IIRC] Or do you tell the player to set the points at a more appropriate level (such as nil in these extremes)?

 

again, within reason, i follow the player's lead. If green froglike martians was acceptable as a campaign feature, based on what we all decided we were looking for, then it would be Ok and yes, his choice would lead me to throwing more such encounters.

 

its not uncommon for an "invasion" or "single enemy" theme to dominate one of my games, especially in a given "season" (one year more or less of real time play, usually about 35-40 sessions.) At the conclucion of that martian invasion" story arc, that disad might well have to be bought off or adjusted, depending on the resolution (which hopefully did result in a reduction in hostile froglike martian attacks or our heroes really screwed the pooch.)

 

But of course, if i thought it was just a joke, i would laugh and ask for the real sheet. if i thought it was a deliberate attempt to cause problems or take advantage of the Gm, we would have a talk.

 

Again, GMing 101 or maybe 102, at best.

[schir1964]

Re: Power Defense

 

An attempt to summarize the points on both sides:

 

1) Power Defense by default protects against all (infinite) SFX specified by any Adjustment Power purchased. The source material reflects more examples of those with limited Power Defense vs those with full Power Defense. Therefore, it would make more sense for Power Defense have a limited effect by default with the option to purchase it to the full effect. How much is costs to purchase the full effect Power Defense may be altered by the GM to reflect the campaign style he is trying to achieve.

 

Viewpoint Observation: This approach views "Damage" as being vs a SFX as opposed to a mechanic. Thus you can cause Physical Damage, Energy Damage, Mental Damage, Flash (Senses) Damage, Power (Various) Damage. The first two are permanent/deadly effects while the other are more temporary/non-lethal effects. Thus all the Defenses have SFX tied into them in one way or another.

 

2) Power Defense by default protects against all Adjustment Powers. It works mechanically identical to the other defenses. If someone wants to limit the effectiveness of the defense they apply the appropriate limitation to the defense.

 

Viewpoint Observation: This approach views "Damage" as being a mechanic as opposed to SFX. Defenses only exist as a subtractor to the associated attack damage rolled.

 

 

Just An Observation

 

- Christopher Mullins

[gojira]

Re: Power Defense

 

2) Power Defense by default protects against all Adjustment Powers. It works mechanically identical to the other defenses. If someone wants to limit the effectiveness of the defense they apply the appropriate limitation to the defense.

 

Or, the attack can be bought with AVLD, which will by-pass all Power Defense in favor of something else. In other words, if the SFX of an attack really shouldn't be stopped by the default Power Defense, add an advantage to the attack.

 

Viewpoint Observation: This approach views "Damage" as being a mechanic vs a SFX. Defenses only exist as a subtractor to the associated attack damage rolled.

 

My viewpoint is actually that the players deserve to be protected from harm. They're HEROES. Defense has always been cheap in Hero system, so why make Power Defense the exception? Besides, the GM always has the option of adding more dice or AVLD to any Adjustment Power.

[schir1964]

Re: Power Defense

 

Or' date=' the attack can be bought with AVLD, which will by-pass all Power Defense in favor of something else. In other words, if the SFX of an attack really shouldn't be stopped by the default Power Defense, add an advantage to the attack.[/quote']

This has nothing to do with the what two sides at odds are discussing. AVLD is a an Advantage, not a Power, so is not relevant to the default design of the system.

 

But since you bring it up, of course you can add an Advantage to a Power to "grant more to a Power than it has by default", but again, this has no bearing on the systme design of how the default definition of defenses interact with the default definition of attacks they are designed for.

 

If you were just making a clarification, that's fine, but it is blantantly obvious one that has already been mentioned in this thread.

 

My viewpoint is actually that the players deserve to be protected from harm. They're HEROES. Defense has always been cheap in Hero system' date=' so why make Power Defense the exception? Besides, the GM always has the option of adding more dice or AVLD to any Adjustment Power.[/quote']

Obviously, since your viewpoint seems to fall within the "Mechanic" side of things, then it will seem clear to you that Power Defense is in line with the other Defenses and the change in question would appear to be an exception to the others.

 

However, if your viewpoint is like the first point, then Power Defense is already an exception to the other defenses and by applying an SFX to it by default brings in back in line with the other Defenses.

 

Keep in mind that I'm not trying to say that one viewpoint is right or wrong, but trying to make clear what the differences are since having one or other influences the evaluation of the rules and how they are applied.

 

I personally don't like inconsitencies within the rules, and Adjustment Powers are rife with them in comparison with the rest of the rules. But I've detailed all that in another thread.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[David Johnston]

Re: Power Defense

 

An attempt to summarize the points on both sides:

 

1) Power Defense by default protects against all (infinite) SFX specified by any Adjustment Power purchased. The source material reflects more examples of those with limited Power Defense vs those with full Power Defense.

By no means. The source material has extremely few who clearly show any form of Power Defense. But of those few who have it, there have been no clear limitations on the funky attacks of that nature that they show resistance to. It's pretty much everything.

[schir1964]

Re: Power Defense

 

By no means. The source material has extremely few who clearly show any form of Power Defense. But of those few who have it' date=' there have been no clear limitations on the funky attacks of that nature that they show resistance to. It's pretty much everything.[/quote']

Since I don't read comics and what little information I have is based on others and movie renditions I need to ask a few questions then.

 

Are you suggesting that the source material has Adjustment Powers being rare in the Genre?

 

Are you suggesting that the source material has just Power Defense being rare in the Genre?

 

I'll have to take your word for it on the answers.

 

However, one thing I do know is that the Alien Suit was able to Drain the Hulk's strength away regardless of his regenerative nature and emotion based strength. Of course this simply happened because the writer wanted it to happen, but that still leaves the point.

 

It is just as valid to say that the SFX of the Power Defense of the Hulk if he indeed did have any Power Defense was limited and the Alien Suit had exactly the SFX needed to affect him, as it is to say that the Alien Suit had an Adjustment Power with AVLD/NND Advantage.

 

Why are both just as valid? Since both require interpretation of the Source Material and the GM must choose how to implement what is in the Source Material.

 

So basically what I am saying is that you say that the examples of Power Defense in the Source Material are all inclusive ones while others say that they are not all inclusive. I doubt you will get a large enough consensus on it to convince one side or the other to change thier mind or the rules whether they are official or not.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[David Johnston]

Re: Power Defense

 

Since I don't read comics and what little information I have is based on others and movie renditions I need to ask a few questions then.

 

Are you suggesting that the source material has Adjustment Powers being rare in the Genre?

 

Are you suggesting that the source material has just Power Defense being rare in the Genre?

 

- Christopher Mullins

Usually almost everyone is pretty much equally vulnerable to Adjustment Powers so far I can tell. Superman is meat for Parasite. Thor can be turned into a frog. Iron Man's armour has no real defense against the Grey Gargoyle. Juggernaught's only defense against Rogue is having so much power she can't hold it all. None of the mutants demonstrates any resistance to Leech's drain field. But characters who would be represented by transforms and drains aren't all that common. either.

 

As for the Alien Suit versus the Hulk, of course having the defense doesn't guarantee you won't be affected.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Power Defense

 

IMX people tend to purchase traits they think will be needed in the game they are to run.

 

People don't buy ED in Pulp HERo because they don't think they will see it used.

 

In your games, they would need to expect to see One SFX Adjustment Powers be more or less as frequent as Energy Attacks to make +1 Power Defense equate to +1 ED, or adjustment powers in general be 3x as common as energy attacks to justify buying Universal power defense.

 

Now, the 3x multiple is probably high, given adjustment powers in general are less common than attacks resisted by ED. OTOH, Power Defense attacks generally roll less dice to start with, so 1 power defense resists more damage than 1 ED.

 

I remain confused, however, as to why this is such an issue for power defense that it should significantly increase in cost, when it's not an issue at all for ED, which reduces damage from at least as many SFX as Power Defense does. Why not restrict ED similarly, and bump its cost up?

 

Why should a character concept which demands "universal immunity to adjustment powers" require such a significant increase in point outlay as opposed to a character concept which demands "universal immunity to energy attacks"? Why not similarly restrict PD, Flash Defense and/or Mental Defense (although I believe the number of SFX for these three is likely lower, esp. Flash which has already been subdivided by sense group)?

 

As long as my players think their pow def will get used, they will buy it. So far, its been easy enough to convince them of that.

 

but really, this gets back to the players understanding and trusting that their Gm will make their traits they spend the hard to come by Cp on see use. My guys understand its much less "will my power defense vs physical trauma get used" but rather "if ai buy this trait, it will play a role". My player's learn and i try to tell them: this is about your characters, so your traits will matter.

 

So that whole notion of "maybe this won't be worth anything, utility down to zero, but it costs points" is a total non-issue for my games.

 

Again, this gets us back to not really needing points at all. Since the utility of each character's abilities will be adjudicated by the GM to make each character more or less equally effective and exciting to play, does it matter that Mighty ThunderMan has 1,000 character points, while Fantastic FrogLad only has 350? If that offends because their points aren't equal, let's make FFL's powers all cost three times as much as the book says - then he's a 1,050 point character, slightly more than MTM. After all, tripling the cost of power defense creates no balance issues, so why should tripling the costs of everything FFL buys create a balance issue?

 

for things to work' date=' each element needs to have give and take over other elements of the same cost, tradeoffs. The example you give is an example of no-tradeoff, and so it defines reasonable balancing by script... well mostly defies. Lets just say it makes it tougher since i cannot throw a situation at universal that he would be worse at than limited would be, using those traits.[/quote']

 

That's fair - we'll have to assume FFL and MTM share no traits in common, so that one is not paying a multiple of 3 for the same thing the other one has. Still, even if they each had a single signature power, and we charged FFL three times the usual cost while letting MTM use book costs, there would appear to be a discrepancy in their power levels.

 

By the way, in your new Power Defense regime, what percentage of adversaries to the PC's will have invested significant points in "Power Defense - SFX none of the heroes have"?

 

if i aloowed it' date=' it would reduce the gunfire directed at your character. you might be the one to draw the sword wielding madmen instead of the gun bunny. or maybe this gives me, in the month of "warm-up sessions", cause to introduce as a manir villan adversary a group of sword wielding types, thereby reducing the number and frequency of gun-threat encounters, to handle as much as ai can your choice to have guns not be a frequent issue for your character.[/quote']

 

Ahhh...all your gun-weilding villains would simply become stupid and shoot at the targets who AREN'T vulnerable. I stand corrected - that sounds like a much better game...

 

You are incorrect . Perhaps simply uninformed.

 

HERo 5er page 112 lists the advantages for adding more SFX to adjustment powers. It lists the following...

 

+1/4 for one SFX

+1/2 for two SFX

+1 for four SFX

+2 for all SFX

 

My power defense variant lists the following...

+0 for one SFX

+1/2 for two SFX

+1/4 more for each additional SFX

thus +1 for four SFX

+2 for all SFX

 

My scale follows almost exactly what PUBLISHED HERO says in terms of adding SFX. The differences are, drawing perhaps from 5e or 4e more than 5er, I break it down by 1/4 rather than just going to the simplified +1 for 3-4.

 

But as far as inventing the +2 value for going to all SFX... thats dead spot on taken from HERO rules in core rulebook.

 

its one of the costs I think he got more or less right

 

Such an advantage is only placed on powers already having an advantage (affects 1 or more powers of same SFX at a time). I don't see such powers very often, again because the SFX issue reduces their utility. When I do see them, they are most commonly purchased within a framework that greatly reduces their cost, such as a slot in FlameWoman's multipower which "Suppresses all Fire powers at once". She pays about 6 points for it (assumed 60 point pool, and an Ultra slot).

 

Defenses are commonly special powers, seen in frameworks much less frequently and thus ineligible for such cost reductions. Although I suppose a Multipower (or VPP) of Power Defense Only might effectively enable "Universal Power Defense" to be purchased at a lesser cost, I doubt I would allow that I would allow it if I considered universal power defense underpriced to the point it should require its cost be tripled.

 

[Hmmm...20 point pool, Cosmic (+2), 1 power only (-2) should equal 30 points for 20 Unlimited Power Defense. Of course, I can only resist one SFX at a time, and I need to know what it is before I can tune my defense.]

[Dust Raven]

Re: Power Defense

 

Sorry but this seems to be very far stretching.

 

the result of the power is that attacks from the target are partially blocked and not as effective, cause less damage.

 

That as an EFFECt in game terms is a suppress or drain vs those attack powers, which removes some of the power of the attack. That is quite easy and direct to model.

 

I disagree. Whever "cause less damage" is uttered, particularly along with "partially blocked", I immediately think of Defenses. If the effect is "causes the attack to be less powerful" then a Suppress or Drain might be appropriate. But I for one feel that using Defense Powers to protect against damage is is fairly accurate. Using anything else is reinventing the wheel.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Power Defense

 

which would be a mistake.

 

this isn't a change, just spelled out explicitly for those who didn't understand that when i said in my first post to this thead "One solution would be to house rule thaT pow def as written applies to a single SFX of effects and allow them to buy additional SFX using the usual scheme for adjustment powers." I actually meant what I siad.

 

See, by not reading that, by not looking at the rules for adjustment powers and seeing that it doesn't make it impossible to buy universal defense, some were able to trump up the "this means i cannot build anyone with universal defense" counter-arguments.

 

this isn't a fix to a fix. It was always there. It was just conveniently ignored by those who wanted to fabricate an invalid argument against it.

 

of course, by explicitly spelling it out, since some didn't get it, now i get the opening of the "see the first was a mistake" lines.

 

Whats next? i get accused of being a flip-flopper?

 

:-)

 

See, there you go arguing your own point against yourself... you are such a flip-flopper! Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

I hope you forgive me not reading whatever post you are referring to. This is a farily long thread and I haven't read each and every post and can't remember with crystal clear accuracy the contents of every post I have read.

 

I'll withdraw my remark about "fixing a fix" though, as it is clear that is not what you did. I must contunue to disagree though, but only as a matter of personal taste at this point. I would have just increased the cost of Power Defense and allowed/encouraged characters to buy it Limited to specific or groups of SFX.

 

I'll now go into why. Not every SFX is equal. There is a reason why "only vs fire" is worth more than "only versus jelly doughnuts thrown very hard". Your method assums that all SFX are evenly distrubuted within the campaign enviornment, which is possible but is vary hard to do or belive. There is also the question of drawing the line. Is crushing different from impacts? Is radiated heat different from contact/induction heat? Are gamma rays different from x-rays? Is necromancy different from alchemy?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Power Defense

 

An attempt to summarize the points on both sides:

Good points and obvservation I must say.

 

1) Power Defense by default protects against all (infinite) SFX specified by any Adjustment Power purchased. The source material reflects more examples of those with limited Power Defense vs those with full Power Defense. Therefore, it would make more sense for Power Defense have a limited effect by default with the option to purchase it to the full effect. How much is costs to purchase the full effect Power Defense may be altered by the GM to reflect the campaign style he is trying to achieve.

If this is truly the argument for why Power Defense should be limited by SFX by default (as a house rule or a stand rule change), then it's a really poor reason. No one knows the Hero System stats of characters in the source material. There are none published. You might find a few the fans threw out, but for every write-up there are a dozen other fans who'll say it was done wrong. In any case, all we see is Hero1 and Hero2 get blasted by green light and Hero1 collapses and Hero2 struggles but remains standing. Did we see an AOE Drain STR here? Maybe a Drain STUN. Maybe a Drain STUN & STR! Maybe just a big EB. Who knows? I don't, neither does anyone, not even the writers because chances are they don't play the Hero System and even if they did I doubt there wrote up the characters using these rules before writing the scenario.

 

2) Power Defense by default protects against all Adjustment Powers. It works mechanically identical to the other defenses. If someone wants to limit the effectiveness of the defense they apply the appropriate limitation to the defense.

 

Viewpoint Observation: This approach views "Damage" as being a mechanic vs a SFX. Defenses only exist as a subtractor to the associated attack damage rolled.

 

I agree with this viewpoint (with the exception that the obversation be stated that "damage" is a mechanic versus a mechanic, and either may have their own SFX of choice), and I believe the game designers do too (not just Steve Long, but the long line of people who have worked on the Hero System rules since the beginning). The rules are abstracts that at best attempt to simluate heroic fiction while maintaining a consistant blance of challenge are fairness to all playing.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

 

I remain confused, however, as to why this is such an issue for power defense that it should significantly increase in cost, when it's not an issue at all for ED, which reduces damage from at least as many SFX as Power Defense does. Why not restrict ED similarly, and bump its cost up?

Well, two reasons mainly...

 

One, while ED does cover a wide variety of SFX they remain not all that dissimilar and many can be conceived as "resisted by a rock" kind of stuff, so the concept of "ED: something that blocks energy" is pretty easy to conceptualize. Pow DEf and the scope which adjustment powers cover not just in SFX but in effect seems to me to be broader. I have more trouble conceptualizing what it is that resists, but that has been stated.

 

A possibly more pragmatic answer is that normal attacks and adjustment powers have a much different SFX mechanic involved.

 

My Eb lightning bolt, fire bolt and so forth will pretty much affect anything. The vast majority of say ED-affecting attacks" will affect anything, be it robots, vehicles, mutants, walls, webbing, aliens and so forth. ED works just like the attacks which usually affect it in this regard... most are not limited by SFX. The EXCEPTIOn for these are the "special resistance ED only vs X" and the attacks which are likewise restricted. They make up the rarer cases, not the majority.

 

Contrast this with, in my games, most adjustment powers being bought limited to a one or couple SFX. The drain fire powers attack does nothing against a challenge when no fire powers are present. My undead life drain does me no good at getting thru a wall, busting out of an entangle etc. By making power defense follow the same SFX based scheme that adjustment powers do, you bring powdef in sync with "most common way adjustment powers work with SFX."

 

Are there exceptions? Sure. Some characteristic drains are bought non-SFX dependent but even then, in my games, maybe not your, there are some obvious implied limits. The mage's cure light wounds spell (Heal body) wont normally be allowed by me to repair the wagon's damage or mend his armor even though technically its not limited to body on humans. The mage's strength drain spell wont be allowed to be thrown at a boat to reduce its carrying capacity, even though noats have a strength score.

 

Now, this isn't why i made the changes, those reasons are already given, but this difference between how many Eb and RKA and "normal defense" attacks are SFX dependent vs how often Adjustment power attacks are SFX dependent is definitely one of the differences between PowDef and ED that makes your oft repeated "but hey what about ED" reductio argument carry little weight for me.

 

I am sure for some your argument holds water. Also, if the majority of adjustemnt powers in my game were in fact like Eb and RKA and so forth and were SFX independent, i would likely feel differently.

 

But for me, if the vast majority of EBs that oppose ED are "vs any SFX" and ED is 1-1, and the majority of adjustment powers are "vs one SFX" then having universal pow def be 1-1 as well seems off, not "obviously right".

 

YMMV.

 

Why should a character concept which demands "universal immunity to adjustment powers" require such a significant increase in point outlay as opposed to a character concept which demands "universal immunity to energy attacks"? Why not similarly restrict PD, Flash Defense and/or Mental Defense (although I believe the number of SFX for these three is likely lower, esp. Flash which has already been subdivided by sense group)?

See above, but again, see the pattern.

 

Sensory attack powers are all bought with costs increasing based on how many senses are effected. (Not directly of course, but increased cost is there.) Similarly flash defense is bought with costs increasing based on how many senses are affected.

 

Again...

 

EB/RKA/HAK: typically bought without SFX dependence on target.

ED/PD to defend against those: also usually not SFX of attack dependent

Def Price: 1-1

 

Flash: bought with higher cost for multiple senses

Flash D: bought with higher cost for multiple senses.

(note: not the same price scheme for both sides which might be a kind of issue.)

Def Price: 1-1 plus more for multiple senses

 

Adjustment powers: typically bought with SFX dependence

Default pow def: typically bought universal.

Def price: 1-1

Tesuji pow Def: typically bought with SFX dependence

Def price: 1-1.

 

the latter seems more in sync with me.

 

 

Again, this gets us back to not really needing points at all.

there are plenty who would argue that you DONT need points at all and many games which play without such. i am not adverse to that approach at all, and games like Sorceror and Over the Edge and others seem to do quite well without extensive point accounting systems for balance and indeed rely almost totally on Gm discretion and Gm scripting for "play balance".

 

indeed, i think i have even seen posters on these forums, perhaps digital hero articles, on running "pointless" HERO.

 

So, its not really that far out to suggest you don't need points, even here.

 

heck, one might even decide to divide all the point costs by 5 to streamline the system math. Wonder if thats ever been tried? :-)

 

Since the utility of each character's abilities will be adjudicated by the GM to make each character more or less equally effective and exciting to play, does it matter that Mighty ThunderMan has 1,000 character points, while Fantastic FrogLad only has 350?

Such a gap in points will have an impact, but it really depends on how the points are spent an how diverse the character's individual traits are. They gap in power levels you describe can possibly be seen in many source comics like the JLA/JLU or maybe avengers where for example Superman and black Canary run along side each other to the weekend's adventure. Its more common for RPGs to work for more balanced "power level" between PCs, as the benefits of "writers liberty" are less pronounced in RPGs, but I have heard of games played that made this work.

 

to me it gets harder on the Gm the more the "power gap" grows, but it really comes down to "differences" between the characters. A 1000 pts brick and a 350 pt mage... i can probably script enough differences to keep both going and having fun.

 

The danger is when they have too much overlap.

 

Have you tried games with widely varying power levels? How did they work out, if so?

If that offends because their points aren't equal, let's make FFL's powers all cost three times as much as the book says - then he's a 1,050 point character, slightly more than MTM. After all, tripling the cost of power defense creates no balance issues, so why should tripling the costs of everything FFL buys create a balance issue?

Ok now you are being silly, right? :-)

 

a person can have their ear pierced and be just fine. pierce their entire body and that can get messy.

 

 

That's fair - we'll have to assume FFL and MTM share no traits in common, so that one is not paying a multiple of 3 for the same thing the other one has. Still, even if they each had a single signature power, and we charged FFL three times the usual cost while letting MTM use book costs, there would appear to be a discrepancy in their power levels.

Hugh, I wouldn't charge a cost if i didn't think it would be able to be played out in "relative" even value.

 

Why not multiply his sig power? well, if i had a reason to, planned on making that work out in play and saw clearl reason to do so, no problem.

 

You cannot toss a hypothetical "what if tesuji did that" and then assume it was a m "tesuji didn't think thru" to try and present a problem.

 

On the other hand, i might just very well say "a 10d6 fire EB costs 75 pts" while i allow a "10d6 ice EB costs 50 pts". this would not be because i had gleefully decided "i want to discourage fire based SFX" but usually more because the campaign genre or theme would be one that made fire better than cold. Maybe the planned campaign is "invasion of the DnD-style trolls" so fire is really really good (acid too.)

 

Again, script balancing is "within the bounds of reason" and that reason is in part determined or maybe just limited by some of the campaign elements.

 

By the way, in your new Power Defense regime, what percentage of adversaries to the PC's will have invested significant points in "Power Defense - SFX none of the heroes have"?

about the same percentage as the players find their power defense or adjustment powers lacking.

 

See their are two types of "bad guys" or "challenges"...

 

random encounters: these are more or less filler guys, like mook guards or hired NPCs or just change of pace bruhahahs. They will not be especially designed to be "spotlighting the PC traits" and will have whatever fits their motif or whatever struck my fancy on the day i grabbed them. As such, they will have stuff appropriate to the encounter and stuff inappropriateto the encounter. They make up a minority of my challenges.

 

Planned encounters: these are planned ahead and thought out and are scripted to do what encounters do... spotlight the heroes traits. So in these, its likely a villains SFX is in line with something of the PCs, either to spotlight a trait or a lack. So these will as likely have powers that hit the heroes defense (to show it off) and will be as likely to have defenes that hit the PCs attack.

 

Ahhh...all your gun-weilding villains would simply become stupid and shoot at the targets who AREN'T vulnerable. I stand corrected - that sounds like a much better game...

Hugh, ok two things... first thats not what I said. Its easy enough to script around reasonable frequencies, and handle these just like you do when someone doesn't take focus on their signature ray gun. You reuce the frequency (by circumstance, by personal motivation, by campaign theme) to fit. If you cannot meet that goal, you have them choose a more reasonable frequency. Like the focus issue, they don't get a complete pass, as even with "no focus lim" your ray gun still can be taken or broken as part of SFX, just a whole lot less often and at less serious times than they guy who saved a dozen pts for it.

 

Second, you seem to have been slowly transitioning from discussing power defense or Gming to outright attacking or just plain ridiculing my GMing style or perhaps evben me.

 

That seems perhaps extreme for you based on prior experience with you on these boards and i have to wonder why you have grown this overtly hostile.

Such an advantage is only placed on powers already having an advantage (affects 1 or more powers of same SFX at a time). I don't see such powers very often, again because the SFX issue reduces their utility.

then i completely understand your difference of opinion on this. In my games, the vast majority of adjustment powers do have the limited by sfx issue. Again this is not a matter of "cost" as much as of concept. its just hard to justify a "drain RKA" power when RKA can represent so maky things across SFX but its easy to justify a "blunt weapons" or a "reduce mutant power." which gets you into the "of given sfx"

 

If the vast majority of adjustment powers in my games were "universal in SFX" then i would likely not be looking at this the same way either.

When I do see them, they are most commonly purchased within a framework that greatly reduces their cost, such as a slot in FlameWoman's multipower which "Suppresses all Fire powers at once". She pays about 6 points for it (assumed 60 point pool, and an Ultra slot).

the price break for frameworks and multipower slots applies across the attack powers gamut, so it really isn't an issue separating adjustment powers from other attacks/powers.

Defenses are commonly special powers, seen in frameworks much less frequently and thus ineligible for such cost reductions. Although I suppose a Multipower (or VPP) of Power Defense Only might effectively enable "Universal Power Defense" to be purchased at a lesser cost, I doubt I would allow that I would allow it if I considered universal power defense underpriced to the point it should require its cost be tripled.

again, the impact of frameworks on relative costs of attack and defense is an across the board thing, not a special issue for adjustment powers.

 

if its an issue for a Gm in his game, he should likely be concerned about the frameworks and consider changing how they work, limiting their use, or dropping them altogether.

 

I know of Gms who have done some/all of those.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

I disagree. Whever "cause less damage" is uttered' date=' particularly along with "partially blocked", I immediately think of Defenses. If the effect is "causes the attack to be less powerful" then a Suppress or Drain might be appropriate. But I for one feel that using Defense Powers to protect against damage is is fairly accurate. Using anything else is reinventing the wheel.[/quote']

 

except that this becomes incredibly difficult to represent under the hero scheme, and recall that cost needs to link in with effect.

 

The effect will reduce the power of an attack made by the targetted guy and the means of doing so is to throw things in its way. (it could for instance be a TK trick, a animla sacrifice trick or even a funky force fields mutant trick.)

 

The NET RESULT IN GAME EFFECTS is tyo reduce the attack by a few dice.

 

The HERO POWER which does that is drain or suppress.

 

Now Sure, i could instead decide to buy the force field (force wall doesn't work due to its "goes down or stops completely" nature plus its stop movement when up feature) but then i need a lot of shenanigans to make it work.

 

lets assume i wanted to stop 3 dice. thats an average of 10 pts of effect.

 

So i start with 10/10 force field.

I need to then buy enough UAA plus number of people affected or what have you to cover everyone in sight, and every tree, and every wall, and every rock or whatever i think might be attacked.

 

10/10 force field

+1 UAA

+1 up to 16 people, walls, cars, doors, computers, etc

+1/2 ranged

 

thats what... 70 ap and only lets me protect 16 targets.

Sure there would be a lim for "only against attacks from my chosen target" but that value wont be all that high, depending on campaign specifics.

 

that also doesn't protect at all against any attack power where PD/ED doesn't apply, like say his fireball fiery flash explosion.

 

thats a might out of whack cost wise when you start looking at 3d6 suppress which can be bought even to NND level for much less than what yu want me to pay so i can "build it using ff".

 

If thats how you want it to go in your games, thats cool, but for me when the result is "knock a few dice off any of this guy's attacks" that is more properly built as a suppress/drain etc, not using a convolutely built UAA force field to accomplish the same effect.

 

.

[tesuji]

Re: Power Defense

 

I'll now go into why. Not every SFX is equal. There is a reason why "only vs fire" is worth more than "only versus jelly doughnuts thrown very hard". Your method assums that all SFX are evenly distrubuted within the campaign enviornment, which is possible but is vary hard to do or belive. There is also the question of drawing the line. Is crushing different from impacts? Is radiated heat different from contact/induction heat? Are gamma rays different from x-rays? Is necromancy different from alchemy?

 

Actually, i make the assumption that the typical characters and typical players will be chosing "reasonable SFX" and not taking thyings like "jelly donuts thrown very hard." If they choose reasonable SFX, one's i see reasonably within the genre, than its a matter of script whether or not they show up relatively evenly.

 

As for how defined it has to get, again, this is where players and Gms talk in chargen. if a player hands you an overly NARROW NND counter for his power, like say "does not affect anyone carrying jelly donuts" does your game explode into a crippled mess?

 

No, you, i bet, talk with the player a bit and work out what common means to you.

 

if a player hands me a "jelly donut" SFX range for his pow def, i will talk to him, probably about the tone of my game and whether this is a silly-humor-hero toon game or an X-Men style game, but also about reasonable scope.

 

If he insists on taking something so very very restircted that i would not feel able to reflect it i would likely say either:

1. take an additional lim to reflect the very narrow range)

2: give it for free and let him know it wont be more than SFX of his other defenses.

 

but this would be the rarity, the one-in-a-million, the extreme-internet-discussion-case-that-never-is-seen-in-actual-games. The vast majority of times, a player will choose an SFX derived from his concept, and i will be able to have "pow-def:tough guy" and "pow-def:holy aura" and "pow-def: hard to alter" play out relatively close in value.

 

this rule is not meant to be bulletproof, any more than HERo 5 is. its meant to work based on cooperation and discussion and understanding between player and Gm and relies on the Gm to be there to handle the problem cases and know when to say No and when to say OK... just like every other rules in HERO.

 

if your campaign has a jelly donut problem... this rule might not be good for you, but then HERo might not be your best choice either, as it relies heavinly on the GM.

[Zephrosyne]

Re: Power Defense

 

Tesuji, I can understand where you are coming from. When I ran Hero System recently, Power Defense did strike me as rather odd. It seemed like the catch all defense that covered everything left over after Physical Defense, Energy Defense, Flash Defense, and Mental Defense. That being said, I kinda take an opposite point of view from yours. I would just encourage the character to take a Limitation based on the defense being "versus a limited special effect" as opposed to making it limited by default. Just my two cents.

[David Johnston]

Re: Power Defense

 

EB/RKA/HAK: typically bought without SFX dependence on target.

ED/PD to defend against those: also usually not SFX of attack dependent

Def Price: 1-1

Has it occured to you that the distinction between EBs that attack ED and EBs that attack PD is in fact special effect based?

 

More importantly of course, it seems difficult to imagine any game world in which adjustment attacks are more common than attacks versus PD or even ED. You'd have to have some bizarro universe where there are no such things as fists or fire to make it possible. What that means is, by rights Power Defense will rarely be of any use. Sure, you can make them more common in response to the existence of Power Defense but that's hardly a reason to get it. It's a reason to avoid it like the plague particularly when its cost has been tripled and you are safer from the attacks without it.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Power Defense

 

One, while ED does cover a wide variety of SFX they remain not all that dissimilar and many can be conceived as "resisted by a rock" kind of stuff, so the concept of "ED: something that blocks energy" is pretty easy to conceptualize. Pow DEf and the scope which adjustment powers cover not just in SFX but in effect seems to me to be broader. I have more trouble conceptualizing what it is that resists, but that has been stated.

 

I do have to ask, why does your trouble conceptualizing the defense warrent an increase in cost?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Power Defense

 

except that this becomes incredibly difficult to represent under the hero scheme, and recall that cost needs to link in with effect.

 

The effect will reduce the power of an attack made by the targetted guy and the means of doing so is to throw things in its way. (it could for instance be a TK trick, a animla sacrifice trick or even a funky force fields mutant trick.)

 

The NET RESULT IN GAME EFFECTS is tyo reduce the attack by a few dice.

The NET RESULTS IN GAME EFFECTS is for a number of people/objects of the characters choice in a defined area to take less damage. It is nothing else, and definately has nothing to do with the dice thrown in any attack.

 

The HERO POWER which does that is drain or suppress.

 

Now Sure, i could instead decide to buy the force field (force wall doesn't work due to its "goes down or stops completely" nature plus its stop movement when up feature) but then i need a lot of shenanigans to make it work.

 

lets assume i wanted to stop 3 dice. thats an average of 10 pts of effect.

 

So i start with 10/10 force field.

I need to then buy enough UAA plus number of people affected or what have you to cover everyone in sight, and every tree, and every wall, and every rock or whatever i think might be attacked.

 

10/10 force field

+1 UAA

+1 up to 16 people, walls, cars, doors, computers, etc

+1/2 ranged

 

thats what... 70 ap and only lets me protect 16 targets.

Sure there would be a lim for "only against attacks from my chosen target" but that value wont be all that high, depending on campaign specifics.

 

that also doesn't protect at all against any attack power where PD/ED doesn't apply, like say his fireball fiery flash explosion.

 

thats a might out of whack cost wise when you start looking at 3d6 suppress which can be bought even to NND level for much less than what yu want me to pay so i can "build it using ff".

 

If thats how you want it to go in your games, thats cool, but for me when the result is "knock a few dice off any of this guy's attacks" that is more properly built as a suppress/drain etc, not using a convolutely built UAA force field to accomplish the same effect.

 

.

 

Well, I would have built the FF with just AOE Selective and UAA; it just blankets the area and whatever the characters wants protected in that area is protected. About the same cost though.

 

And what's wrong with the cost? For some reason you think that any ability that shaves off 10 points of STUN from any attack to EVERYONE (16 people! in your example) should be cheap! Or cheaper than providing 30 PD/30 ED to a single character at no range at least. How can you say the cost is too high? "Only" 16 people... damn.

 

This does sound more like you want it to all only affect the attacks from a single target though, which is the first I've heard of it. You stated a Suppression Field which affects any and all used of the affected Power or SFX in the area, not just from a single character. If you wanted it that way, then go ahead and buy a Suppress, and since the target's Power Defense shouldn't apply (because the SFX is defined as an interruption of the attack rather than an affect on the character using the attack), you can make it NND versus attacks with Indirect or something. Either way your problem is solved without a bunch of work around and kludgy builds and even without complaint that something might be wrong with the cost or use of Power Defense because it doesn't even apply to the problem.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Power Defense

 

Actually, i make the assumption that the typical characters and typical players will be chosing "reasonable SFX" and not taking thyings like "jelly donuts thrown very hard." If they choose reasonable SFX, one's i see reasonably within the genre, than its a matter of script whether or not they show up relatively evenly.

 

As for how defined it has to get, again, this is where players and Gms talk in chargen. if a player hands you an overly NARROW NND counter for his power, like say "does not affect anyone carrying jelly donuts" does your game explode into a crippled mess?

 

No, you, i bet, talk with the player a bit and work out what common means to you.

 

if a player hands me a "jelly donut" SFX range for his pow def, i will talk to him, probably about the tone of my game and whether this is a silly-humor-hero toon game or an X-Men style game, but also about reasonable scope.

 

If he insists on taking something so very very restircted that i would not feel able to reflect it i would likely say either:

1. take an additional lim to reflect the very narrow range)

2: give it for free and let him know it wont be more than SFX of his other defenses.

 

but this would be the rarity, the one-in-a-million, the extreme-internet-discussion-case-that-never-is-seen-in-actual-games. The vast majority of times, a player will choose an SFX derived from his concept, and i will be able to have "pow-def:tough guy" and "pow-def:holy aura" and "pow-def: hard to alter" play out relatively close in value.

 

this rule is not meant to be bulletproof, any more than HERo 5 is. its meant to work based on cooperation and discussion and understanding between player and Gm and relies on the Gm to be there to handle the problem cases and know when to say No and when to say OK... just like every other rules in HERO.

 

if your campaign has a jelly donut problem... this rule might not be good for you, but then HERo might not be your best choice either, as it relies heavinly on the GM.

 

Nope, my game doesn't have a jelly donut problem, but the SFX found therein do have varying degrees of frequency that do not change just because one character buys a certain attack or a certain defense. I've already decided how common certain effects are and charge appropriately for Limitations that only affect (or are not affected by) them. It's just as valid to let the players pick what value they think it should be and have the GM make it so. That's just an alternate style. But I can't understand charging the same value for all SFX by default. If a character buys his Electrical Blast "not versus rubber" what's the value for the Limitation? Is it the same value as "not versus silver" bought for the werewolf's regeneration? How about the "only versus undead" holy light spell the faith mage knows? All the same value? If not, then why to they have the same value when bought for Power Defense?