Culmulative Entangle?

[SpydirShellX]

What is the effect of applying culmulative to an entangle?

Does it increase the DEF and BOD?

And does it override the normal using an entangle on a entangle rules? (Heal at least 1 BOD or to the higher BOD whichever is greater and use the higher DEF)

[Zed-F]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

My take: you can't add Cumulative to an entangle. Use the normal rules.

 

Cumulative is meant for those powers where you have to build up to meet a given threshold to have an effect. It's not meant for powers like EB and Entangle where you have an effect automatically.

[Karmakaze]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

My take: you can't add Cumulative to an entangle. Use the normal rules.

 

Cumulative is meant for those powers where you have to build up to meet a given threshold to have an effect. It's not meant for powers like EB and Entangle where you have an effect automatically.

 

I could see a SFX where it would take an Entangle a while to take effect. Think of quicksand - the longer you're in it, the harder it is to get out...

[BNakagawa]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

I could see a SFX where it would take an Entangle a while to take effect. Think of quicksand - the longer you're in it' date=' the harder it is to get out...[/quote']

 

 

then what you want is a large entangle with a limitation that causes only part of it to be immediately applied with the rest coming later at whatever schedule you pick.

 

Using a cumulative advantage to make an entangle that hardens and increases itself is functionally analogous to an advantage to an EB that makes the dice do more damage. (always a bad idea because of advantage stacking)

 

$0.02

[SpydirShellX]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

The character is an evil man-spider with the ability to cocoon his opponents. He's got a sort of two-phase cocoon. The first half is the standard webbing portion... then he's sprays a liquid on it that makes it set like cement.

 

In other words, if the good guys can break out or keep him busy before he can finish it, it's far easier to break out.

 

The problem I'm running into is that I'm having trouble designing it where it actually is a point savings....hmm...

 

Would constructing it in parts be a viable alternative?

Entangle 3 DEF 3d6 BOD

Entangle +3 DEF +3d6 BOD Only usable if target is already entangled (-1/2)

 

Good Modifier? Bad? Or would some other method work?

[mattingly]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Multipower: Webbing

Slot 1: Entangle (8 BODY, 4 DEF)

Slot 2: Entangle (4 BODY, 8 DEF)

 

First Phase, they get hit with 8 BODY and 4 DEF. Second Phase, they get hit with 8 DEF and 4 BODY. The DEF goes up to a total of 8, and the BODY goes up to 9 (since each Entangle after the first adds +1 BODY per hit).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Would constructing it in parts be a viable alternative?

Entangle 3 DEF 3d6 BOD

Entangle +3 DEF +3d6 BOD Only usable if target is already entangled (-1/2)

 

I think that's the best approach - a base Entangle he can use in a single phase, plus additional entangle if he has more phases to add webbing, with some point where added webbing only has the marginal benefit of adding 1 to the BOD.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

The character is an evil man-spider with the ability to cocoon his opponents. He's got a sort of two-phase cocoon. The first half is the standard webbing portion... then he's sprays a liquid on it that makes it set like cement.

 

In other words, if the good guys can break out or keep him busy before he can finish it, it's far easier to break out.

 

The problem I'm running into is that I'm having trouble designing it where it actually is a point savings....hmm...

 

Would constructing it in parts be a viable alternative?

Entangle 3 DEF 3d6 BOD

Entangle +3 DEF +3d6 BOD Only usable if target is already entangled (-1/2)

 

Good Modifier? Bad? Or would some other method work?

 

I've always thought of entangle as a bit useless. This approach (and the mattingly modifications) make it a power to be really reckoned with. Might have to hand out some rep here....

[Zed-F]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Entangle is great against certain kinds of opponents, and merely good against other kinds of opponents.

 

There are some opponents against which entangle is pretty much useless, but the ability to put someone at 0 DCV for your teammate to lay the smackdown on is very powerful. Even if the guy can break out of the entangle easily, breaking out of an entangle is still at least a zero-phase action. The target can't do it until his phase comes around, unless he wants to abort to exert casual STR.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Entangle is great against certain kinds of opponents, and merely good against other kinds of opponents.

 

There are some opponents against which entangle is pretty much useless, but the ability to put someone at 0 DCV for your teammate to lay the smackdown on is very powerful. Even if the guy can break out of the entangle easily, breaking out of an entangle is still at least a zero-phase action. The target can't do it until his phase comes around, unless he wants to abort to exert casual STR.

 

IIRC, exertion of casual STR is a free action - you don't need to abort.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Multipower: Webbing

Slot 1: Entangle (8 BODY, 4 DEF)

Slot 2: Entangle (4 BODY, 8 DEF)

 

First Phase, they get hit with 8 BODY and 4 DEF. Second Phase, they get hit with 8 DEF and 4 BODY. The DEF goes up to a total of 8, and the BODY goes up to 9 (since each Entangle after the first adds +1 BODY per hit).

 

Such a simple solution. I am so jealous.

[Robyn]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Multipower: Webbing

Slot 1: Entangle (8 BODY, 4 DEF)

Slot 2: Entangle (4 BODY, 8 DEF)

 

First Phase, they get hit with 8 BODY and 4 DEF. Second Phase, they get hit with 8 DEF and 4 BODY. The DEF goes up to a total of 8, and the BODY goes up to 9 (since each Entangle after the first adds +1 BODY per hit).

 

Wouldn't this still require an action, though, for each successive Entangle? Not to mention the time to switch to the second slot in the Multipower. Plus there's the "attack roll required", and even with the person unable to move, you could still miss.

 

I could see a SFX where it would take an Entangle a while to take effect. Think of quicksand - the longer you're in it' date=' the harder it is to get out...[/quote']

 

This is Gradual Effect, isn't it?

 

Cumulative is meant for those powers where you have to build up to meet a given threshold to have an effect.

 

Perhaps a Delayed Effect, then? No, but something similar. How about Trigger?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Entangle is great against certain kinds of opponents, and merely good against other kinds of opponents.

 

There are some opponents against which entangle is pretty much useless, but the ability to put someone at 0 DCV for your teammate to lay the smackdown on is very powerful. Even if the guy can break out of the entangle easily, breaking out of an entangle is still at least a zero-phase action. The target can't do it until his phase comes around, unless he wants to abort to exert casual STR.

 

Hmm.

 

'The smackdown' presumably being your teammate breaking the target out of the entangle?

 

Hmm.

[Zed-F]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

IIRC' date=' exertion of casual STR is a free action - you don't need to abort.[/quote']

 

My copy of FREd says it's a zero-phase action, not a free action. Even if you house-rule otherwise, you don't need a very tough entangle to beat most opponents' casual STR.

[Zed-F]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Hmm.

 

'The smackdown' presumably being your teammate breaking the target out of the entangle?

 

Hmm.

Yeah, he might break the entangle. Or the entangle might not block the attack, depending on what advantages it has. Even if he does break the entangle, since he's presumably going to be using a big attack, the entangle might not absorb enough of the damage to really matter -- or if it does, the tradeoff to get the target to 0 DCV could be worth it anyway. And if you have more than one teammate, coordinated attacks suddenly become trivially simple to land...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Another rules inconsistency then - you can break out of a grab as a free action with casual strength.

 

Stupid idea, really: 1d6/1d6 entangle (10 points) enables you to zero the DCV of Grond?

 

I don't think so.

[Kelcyron]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Another rules inconsistency then - you can break out of a grab as a free action with casual strength.

 

Stupid idea, really: 1d6/1d6 entangle (10 points) enables you to zero the DCV of Grond?

 

I don't think so.

 

As soon as the entangle hits, you get a casual strength roll to break out. Grond, with his STR of 90, gets to roll 9 dice against the 1def/1body entangle and breaks out without thinking about it. On average, Grond rolls 9 body with his 45 casual strength and breaks out of a 45 active (5def, 4d6) entangle without really even realizing he's been entangled.

 

45 strength, 45 active entangle. Nice symmetry.

 

Kelcyron

[mattingly]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

1d6/1d6 entangle (10 points) enables you to zero the DCV of Grond?

Would you believe... a 1d6/1d6 Mental Entangle?

[Bloodstone]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Another rules inconsistency then - you can break out of a grab as a free action with casual strength.

 

Stupid idea, really: 1d6/1d6 entangle (10 points) enables you to zero the DCV of Grond?

 

I don't think so.

 

Grond has a base DCV of 6 and suffers an additional -2 for his large size. In additon, he spends most of his time at a 2 or 0 (technically -1) by virtue of using Grab and Haymaker constantly. Droping him to 0 DCV is not that signifigant of an issue for the big lug

 

That said, Steve has a comment about the abuse of low die entangles in the FAQ:

 

 

Q: Is an Entangled character immediately at 0 DCV until he breaks free, regardless of the relative power of the Entangle and himself? For example, could a character attack a “brick” with a measly Entangle 2d6 and reduce him to DCV 0 until the brick’s Phase comes up and he breaks out with Casual STR?

 

A: An Entangled character’s DCV immediately drops to 0, so yes, technically speaking, the tactic you suggest is a possible one. As always, though, the GM should leaven his interpretation of the rules with some common sense and dramatic sense. For example, the GM might let the Entangled character try to shrug out of it immediately using Casual STR (just as characters who are Grabbed get to, per 5ER 387). However, this may grant an unfair advantage to high-STR characters, unless the GM grants a similar “casual attack” ability to characters with Energy Blast and the like.

 

Obviously, if PCs start to abuse the “quickie Entangle for 0 DCV” tactic, the GM should forbid it, weaken it, or start using it on them so much they learn the error of their ways.

[Zed-F]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

How often do you fight opponents with 90 STR, with a character whose attacks hover around 45 AP or less? Obviously this won't work on everyone, especially if you make Casual STR a free action instead of a zero-phase action. But it will work most of the time, and against most opponents the Casual STR as a free action bit won't matter in the slightest. 60 AP attacks versus a 60-75 STR brick is a lot more likely scenario. And not all opponents are bricks. The EBer doesn't get to use his EB to break out of the entangle as a 0-phase action, no matter how many dice it has.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

As soon as the entangle hits, you get a casual strength roll to break out. Grond, with his STR of 90, gets to roll 9 dice against the 1def/1body entangle and breaks out without thinking about it. On average, Grond rolls 9 body with his 45 casual strength and breaks out of a 45 active (5def, 4d6) entangle without really even realizing he's been entangled.

 

45 strength, 45 active entangle. Nice symmetry.

 

Kelcyron

 

Technically you can apply casual strength as a free action to a grab but as a zero phase action to an entangle. That is why Steve needed to exhonerate the application of a critical eye and suggest you basically fluff it if it is not working (to paraphrase the great man).

 

To be honest I'm not too bothered about bricks - they rarely rely on high DCV anyway, but what about the 25 STR martial artist hit with a 1d6/1d6 AoE entangle - a 15 point power that could zero their DCV, making them a sitting duck, until their next phase. Handing out free casual strength actions is far less obvious in that instance, but not doing it could be far more devastating.

 

The trouble is that this uses an absolute effect and runs it to an illogical consequence. Hero always struggles with absolute effects: any application of this power zeros your DCV.

 

I'd be all for allowing casual strength as a free action, allowing the powerful to effectively ignore the meagre effects of something like this. As Steve points out does this mean that we should be allowing an energy blaster a free action to casually blast out of an entangle? Probably, if we are concerned about game balance. Personally I'm not sure: high strength may be a power as much as an EB but switching on an EB seems different to me somehow.

 

Another interesting effect of the 'absolutes' of Entangle is that it imobilises someone. So a falling character, certainly if they were falling near a wall - even though they are at terminal velocity, a 1d6 entangle SHOULD stop them by application of the rules. Of course gravity may get free actions with its casual strength too.....

[Robyn]

Re: Culmulative Entangle?

 

Hero always struggles with absolute effects: any application of this power zeros your DCV.

 

Concentration has an option for lowering your DCV to zero. Sounds pretty absolute to me

 

As Steve points out does this mean that we should be allowing an energy blaster a free action to casually blast out of an entangle? Probably' date=' if we are concerned about game balance. Personally I'm not sure: high strength may be a power as much as an EB but switching on an EB seems different to me somehow.[/quote']

 

If you're unsure about "switching", don't let them take a movement on their following Phase: casual STR can break an Entangle in the course of movement, EB's can break an Entangle in the course of their next attack, etcetera.

 

Or should a Movement power be required (and enabled) to break out of an Entangle if the character's next action is a movement?

 

Another interesting effect of the 'absolutes' of Entangle is that it imobilises someone. So a falling character' date=' certainly if they were falling near a wall - even though they are at terminal velocity, a 1d6 entangle SHOULD stop them by application of the rules. Of course gravity may get free actions with its casual strength too.....[/quote']

 

Call it, not gravity, but their momentum, which is a natural Movement power paid for by gravity?