Superfluous Powers

[Dust Raven]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Actually, none of the removals suggested make any sense to me.

 

What does make sense to me is folding Aid, Healing, and Succor back into one power.

 

While Healing is a different Power, Succor is still part of Aid and has never been it's own Power. I'm of a different opinion though and feel that Succor should be completely separated from Aid because its mechanics are so different (so different it requires its own entry in HD instead of a toggle for Aid).

 

Aid and Healing should probably be rolled into a single Power, but not like it was in 4E. Since Aid and Healing have the same cost and same options (more or less), you could just make Healing a special option for Aid. Define Aid as "healing" instead of adding and the points never fade, but can't raise Powers or Characteristics above their starting value. This could effectively be a +0 Modifier, like STUN Only is for EB.

[Lucius]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

.

 

Of course, FF has a few options created in 5th Edition that make it sufficently different, mechanically, than how Armor and the other work. Well, it has one important option, the Protects Carried Objects Adder. Granted, this sounds like a super cheap version of UBO, but it does make FF work different enough that it makes (enough) sense to keep it in the rules.

 

Any reason we can't just add the adder to Armor?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wonders if powers should have subtractors as well as adders...

[Dust Raven]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Any reason we can't just add the adder to Armor?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wonders if powers should have subtractors as well as adders...

 

Other than 'cuz I said no?

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

We once played around with eliminating Armor, FF and Damage Resistance as powers and just making them modifiers to a character's PD & ED stats. But frankly it got more confusing than it was worth. Personally I wouldn't miss Gliding or Swinging if they just became limited forms of Flight. Yes you could theoretically add Running & Swimming into one generic movement power, but since the vast majority of characters get those two automatically whether or not they have Flight, it's probably less confusing to keep them seperate.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Why not just drop Armor, FF, and Damage Resistance entirely, and have the following Characteristics:

PD, ED, rPD, rED

Then Armor would just be the equivalent of buying up rPD/rED, Damage Resistance would be the equivalent of selling off PD/ED and buying up rPD/rED in the same amount (or with a Limitation that it doesn't stack with a like amount of PD/ED), FF is just rPD/rED with Costs End, etc.

 

Whatever. I think it could be massaged into something that works and isn't too complicated any way you chose to do it. Costs might have to be played with a tiny bit to keep Attacks and DEF at about the same cost ratio they are today, but if we're being bold enough to start crossing out Powers then that shouldn't be much of a problem right?

[David Johnston]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Why not just drop Armor' date=' FF, and Damage Resistance entirely, and have the following Characteristics:[indent']PD, ED, rPD, rED[/indent]Then Armor would just be the equivalent of buying up rPD/rED, Damage Resistance would be the equivalent of selling off PD/ED and buying up rPD/rED in the same amount (or with a Limitation that it doesn't stack with a like amount of PD/ED), FF is just rPD/rED with Costs End, etc.

 

 

The main reason for damage resistance to exist is to simplify damage calculations for people who have resistant protection from a power, but also the calculated physical defense from their stats.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Why not just drop Armor' date=' FF, and Damage Resistance entirely, and have the following Characteristics:[indent']PD, ED, rPD, rED

[/indent]Because having resistant defense is a Power, not a Characteristic. Normal humans (the base of all character templates) does not have any resistant defenses.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Because having resistant defense is a Power' date=' not a Characteristic. Normal humans (the base of all character templates) does not have any resistant defenses.[/quote']

So? Normal humans don't have MD either. Should I have said, "Traits," instead of, "Characteristics?" My bad.

[mattingly]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

I'd fold Supress into Dispel if I did anything.

If Drain is the opposite of Aid, and Suppress is the opposite of Succor, should there be an opposite of Dispel?

 

If Dispel removes something entirely or has no effect, maybe a 3-per-d6 Create power (that would need to beat the Active Points in the object) would make more sense than the normal Transform air into X construct (that has to beat the BODY of the object).

[Lxndr]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Isn't Dispel just Suppress with the Instant limitation?

[Black Rose]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

I'm about to commit one of those long-***, comment on everyone's posts, post. Sorry.

 

Honestly' date=' this is a pointless discussion. There's a lot of overlap out there, such as Darkness/Change Environment, Swimming/Flight (plus underwater movement), etc. But no two powers are the same. I don't really see any redundancy in the book.[/quote']

I seem to recall a thread on area effects which pointed out that we have three different area effect structures; Change Environment (x2 radius per +5 pts), Darkness (+1" radius per +5 pts), and Images (x2 radius as a +1/4 advantage). For my own needs, I'm willing to declare an Absolute Sense Ceiling, whereafter a sense-affecting power is the winner no matter what. If some sort of conflict come into play, I'l adjudicate it then and there, leaning towards the sense-affecting power (I don't like "I can see everything!!!!" powers, sorry).

 

I would like to see a unified area effect structure, though. Any thoughts?

 

I'd fold Supress into Dispel if I did anything.

Is the idea with folding Suppress into Dispel that Dispel turns off powers in an all or nothing format, whereas Suppress can do it piecemeal? In that case, I'd go for folding Dispel into Suppress; that way it's a case of All Or Nothing (-1/2).

 

Kenn, Dust Raven, and Hugh Neilson's comments on the Armor/FF issue

All I was saying was that they form a circular build IMO. One is a riff on the other. I'd go with PD, ED, and Damage Resistance if I was being picky about it, but I think, for elegance's sake, Armor and Damage Resistance are all that's needed.

 

What does make sense to me is folding Aid' date=' Healing, and Succor back into one power.[/quote']

While Healing is a different Power, Succor is still part of Aid and has never been it's own Power. I'm of a different opinion though and feel that Succor should be completely separated from Aid because its mechanics are so different (so different it requires its own entry in HD instead of a toggle for Aid).

 

Aid and Healing should probably be rolled into a single Power, but not like it was in 4E. Since Aid and Healing have the same cost and same options (more or less), you could just make Healing a special option for Aid. Define Aid as "healing" instead of adding and the points never fade, but can't raise Powers or Characteristics above their starting value. This could effectively be a +0 Modifier, like STUN Only is for EB.

I like this idea. For me, Aid became much less useful with 5th ed, mostly because it's really only cost-effective when you're Aiding multiple characteristics/powers; otherwise you might as well up buy the characteristic/power itself and same some points.

[dstarfire]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Hmmm, I'm surprised nobody mentioned growth or shrinking. Rulebook explicitly states they can be easily built using other powers ("... for characters who are always unusually big/small, construct similar effects using other powers")

 

Swinging's always been one of my pet peeves. A special power construct that's really in comic book settings.

 

On the other hand, I'd recommend adding a section on 'common power constructs' that'd cover all things like swinging, swimming, regeneration, etc. While not powers in their own right, they still have a distinctly different effect than the parent power.

[Lucius]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Hmmm' date=' I'm surprised nobody mentioned growth or shrinking. Rulebook explicitly states they can be easily built using other powers ("... for characters who are always unusually big/small, construct similar effects using other powers[/quote']

 

I guess some of us still don't see a thing wrong with Growth, Shrinking, or Density Increase, Always On. I have said that if they're going to outlaw these powers for those who are always a different size/mass, I don't know why they didn't just delete them entirely. I could probably live with it either way, but I don't get the inconsistency.

 

 

Swinging's always been one of my pet peeves. A special power construct that's really in comic book settings.

 

Before there was Spiderman, there was Tarzan. Before there was Tarzan, there were swashbuckling pirates in still earlier movies using the ropes and rigging of sailing ships. Before that there were real life circus performers, and before that, real pirates and sailors in the age of the tall sailing ships.

 

I don't know why I keep seeing people online here stating that "X is only in comic books." Whatever X you pick, it's never true that it originated in comics or appears only in comics.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary has never appeared in a comic book, although it did make a guest appearance in an illustrated children's book once.

[David Johnston]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

 

Before there was Spiderman, there was Tarzan.

 

 

.

 

But only movie Tarzan. The book Tarzan didn't swing. Needless to say the swashbuckling pirates swinging from the mast aren't using a swinging power. They're just making an Acrobatics roll.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

If Drain is the opposite of Aid, and Suppress is the opposite of Succor, should there be an opposite of Dispel?

 

If Dispel removes something entirely or has no effect, maybe a 3-per-d6 Create power (that would need to beat the Active Points in the object) would make more sense than the normal Transform air into X construct (that has to beat the BODY of the object).

 

I thought the opposite of Dispel was "I turn my FF back on."

[Dust Raven]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

I like this idea.

Thank you.

For me, Aid became much less useful with 5th ed, mostly because it's really only cost-effective when you're Aiding multiple characteristics/powers; otherwise you might as well up buy the characteristic/power itself and same some points.

As mentioned on another recent thread, Aid is cost effective in many ways without affecting more than one Characteristic/Power. It's often viewed as being not cost effective because people forget it can be used on other people, multiple people. What's more cost effective? +10 STR No Figured Characteristics or AID STR 3d6? Sure, the one costs half as much and doesn't require an action to turn on, but the other one can give extra STR to several people at the same time (well, you'll get to a point where the first few have faded as you add more, but since it takes a Turn, you can get a number in before it's all gone).

[Dust Raven]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

I don't know why I keep seeing people online here stating that "X is only in comic books." Whatever X you pick, it's never true that it originated in comics or appears only in comics.

 

I pick mutant superpowers.

 

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

I pick mutant superpowers.

 

 

Gamma World wasn't a comic book (initially)

[ideasmith]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

Gamma World wasn't a comic book (initially)

 

The X-men predate Gamma World.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Superfluous Powers

 

The X-men predate Gamma World.

 

Yes, but the issue was whether they ONLY were found in comic books. They are not. They're also in Sci Fi movies (Beneath the Planet of the Apes, for example) and other genres.

[Lucius]

Re: Super (fluous) Powers

 

But only movie Tarzan. The book Tarzan didn't swing. Needless to say the swashbuckling pirates swinging from the mast aren't using a swinging power. They're just making an Acrobatics roll.

 

And Spiderman isn’t?

 

Seriously, people have claimed that if Swinging weren’t in the book, it would be a special case of Flight. Are we sure it wouldn’t have just gotten lumped in with Acrobatics?

 

I don't know why I keep seeing people online here stating that "X is only in comic books." Whatever X you pick, it's never true that it originated in comics or appears only in comics.

 

I pick mutant superpowers.

 

 

Gamma World wasn't a comic book (initially)

 

The X-men predate Gamma World.

 

Okay, we can consider it proven that this particular “X†is not unique to comics. Whether it started there is another matter; there are people around here who know a lot more about pulp-era science fiction than I do, and their opinion would be worth more than mine.

 

But allow me to restate my claim: I think that there is no Power (as in, a Hero mechanical Power) in the rulebook that is unique to comics; and I frankly doubt that there is one that originates in comics either.

 

As for other “bits†than the mechanical Powers, there may be ideas that originate in comics, and in fact, I’m willing to concede there may be ideas that are basically unique to them.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Insert palindromedary tagline here. I’m too sick to think of one tonight.

[David Johnston]

Re: Super (fluous) Powers

 

And Spiderman isn’t?

 

Seriously, people have claimed that if Swinging weren’t in the book, it would be a special case of Flight. Are we sure it wouldn’t have just gotten lumped in with Acrobatics?

 

 

No. Spiderman isn't. The difference between Spiderman and Captain Blood is that Spiderman makes his own ropes to swing from and they attach everywhere. Captain Blood must rely on ropes or chandeliers that the environment supplies as the GM sees fit.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Super (fluous) Powers

 

But allow me to restate my claim: I think that there is no Power (as in' date=' a Hero mechanical Power) in the rulebook that is unique to comics; and I frankly doubt that there is one that originates in comics either.[/quote']

 

I do agree completely of course; I was just being a twit. Though I do believe "mutant superpowers" originated in the comics. Before that there were mutant and mutations, but what "powers" they had could hardly be called super.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Super (fluous) Powers

 

I do agree completely of course; I was just being a twit. Though I do believe "mutant superpowers" originated in the comics. Before that there were mutant and mutations' date=' but what "powers" they had could hardly be called super.[/quote']

 

This depends on what we call "super". Before the comics invented Superman and Superheroes, the term "Super" was rarely used to describe "powers and abilities beyond those of mortal men". But many characters who predated comics had powers which the comics would have classified as "super". Hugo Danner was a pulp precursor to Superman; The Shadow's hypnosis and "power to cloud men's minds" make him a proto-mentalist and the Avenger's super-disguise come to mind from the pulps. And who symbolizes Super-Strength more than Hercules?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Super (fluous) Powers

 

This depends on what we call "super". Before the comics invented Superman and Superheroes' date=' the term "Super" was rarely used to describe "powers and abilities beyond those of mortal men". But many characters who predated comics had powers which the comics would have classified as "super". Hugo Danner was a pulp precursor to Superman; The Shadow's hypnosis and "power to cloud men's minds" make him a proto-mentalist and the Avenger's super-disguise come to mind from the pulps. And who symbolizes Super-Strength more than Hercules?[/quote']

 

Absolutely! But none of those are mutant are they?