Force Wall Modification

[Metaphysician]

Okay, pretty much since I got into Hero System, I've considered Force Wall to be mostly useless. Sure, it has some useful properties, but the problem is it is *waaay* too expensive for its effect, compared to Force Field, Armor, and Entangle.

 

Thus, I propose the following change: Force Walls should *not* fall automatically when their defense is exceeded. Instead, the damage is transmitted as per current rules, with the wall remaining intact. In the case of attempts to force one's way through it, this is treated as a strength action against the force wall, assisted by movement if applicable, and if successful allows for pushing through the wall, while again, the wall remains up.

 

My logic for doing this: compared with Entangle, the same active points will produce a barrier that blocks the same amount of damage. The downside for the Entangle is at least a third this blocking is via body, and not defense. On the upside for the Entangle, however:

 

-The Entangle costs no END to maintain

 

-The Entangle can also be used to, well, Entangle people, or a -1 limit can be applied, radically reducing the cost

 

Thoughts?

[BNakagawa]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

I don't think force walls are underpowered, except perhaps for the hexsides revision in 5th.

 

one of the most abusive aspects of force wall is the ability to alter the balance between pd and ed. An entangle defaults to generic defense that affects either equally. You could build a force wall that was transparent to energy damage with massive PD. Drop that on a martial artist and bury him in area effect 1 hex energy blast that he can't dive for cover away from...

 

Put an all energy, transparent to physical Force Wall and an all Physical, transparent to energy Force Wall in a mutipower. Use this one against the brick, that one against the blaster and you're good to go. Entangle can't play that trick unless you're not limited by active points...

[JohnTaber]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

I thought you had to define the PD/ED ratio? Are you sure?

 

BTW. FW is REALLY weak. I totally agree and I kinda like your idea.

[zornwil]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

You can define the "ratio" though as x:0, there are examples in the book of 10 ED and 0 PD and 20 PD and 0 ED.

 

However, somewhat mitigating that is the whole idea of the FW breaking down if suffering BOD damage greater than the FW - because as the book states, if you have a 0 ED FW and it receives even 1 BOD of Energy, it collapses, taking down the whole PD with it (that's the 20 PD/0 ED example in the book).

 

So take heed if you allow the FW to stand no matter what BOD it takes.

 

I think there is a cost issue with FW, since players don't really take it at all. It's fine for villains since GMs don't have to worry about points' effectiveness.

[Metaphysician]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

Hmm, point taken. Perhaps, if I implemented my modification, Transparency should have an increased cost?

[zornwil]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

It may be as simple as being watchful of limits on FW; Transparency per se (I mean as an Advantage) isn't going to be an issue since you don't have to take that to stack points on the ED or PD side.

 

It might be simplest to just reduce the cost of FW overall, too, to 5 for 3 res def or such, I don't recall what people found in analyzing the math but there's been threads on it. Whatever those found, one could always go to funky sets of numbers that would balance better (9 for 4 and so forth).

[BNakagawa]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

at 5/3, force wall becomes overpowering. A 60 point force wall will have 36 points of defense, which are far more than can be easily breached by any non-advantage stacked 60 AP attack power.

 

An 18/18 force wall takes a 60 STR brick's pushed haymaker and even then, an average roll won't break it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

In an average game, say 60 AP limit, a force wall of 12/12 pd/ed is competing against 12d6 ebs, and will rarely even last one attack. What it is pretty good for is avoiding damge from AoE attacks which tend to have fewer DCs because of the advantage, but generally I agree. I'd be less worried if you couldn't form barriers with entangle: to my mind that steals a LOT of FW's thunder.

 

I would change FW but like this: make it cheaper, by allowing the FW to be built with BODY at 4 points of DEF per 5 cps. Then you can mix and match defence and body, and, say, build a FW with 6pd/6ed and 12 body, so no single attack is likely to take it down, but will weaken it.

 

FW can be reinforced by spending enough END to restore lost BODY i.e. 1 point will restore 8 BODY as a movement action.

 

I'd also remove the ability of entangle to form barriers and make the BODY of entangle a bit cheaper, but leave the DEF where it is.

[Metaphysician]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

at 5/3, force wall becomes overpowering. A 60 point force wall will have 36 points of defense, which are far more than can be easily breached by any non-advantage stacked 60 AP attack power.

 

An 18/18 force wall takes a 60 STR brick's pushed haymaker and even then, an average roll won't break it.

 

But at the same time, said force wall can't be attacked through by physical or energy means. And you need to factor in the size of the wall, which ups cost. Otherwise, it can be circumvented.

[zornwil]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

In an average game, say 60 AP limit, a force wall of 12/12 pd/ed is competing against 12d6 ebs, and will rarely even last one attack. What it is pretty good for is avoiding damge from AoE attacks which tend to have fewer DCs because of the advantage, but generally I agree. I'd be less worried if you couldn't form barriers with entangle: to my mind that steals a LOT of FW's thunder.

 

I would change FW but like this: make it cheaper, by allowing the FW to be built with BODY at 4 points of DEF per 5 cps. Then you can mix and match defence and body, and, say, build a FW with 6pd/6ed and 12 body, so no single attack is likely to take it down, but will weaken it.

 

FW can be reinforced by spending enough END to restore lost BODY i.e. 1 point will restore 8 BODY as a movement action.

 

I'd also remove the ability of entangle to form barriers and make the BODY of entangle a bit cheaper, but leave the DEF where it is.

I'd wonder if maybe Entangle and FW shouldn't at some point be merged into a Barrier power, variations being personal (Entangle) versus area (FW) Barriers.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

I'd wonder if maybe Entangle and FW shouldn't at some point be merged into a Barrier power' date=' variations being personal (Entangle) versus area (FW) Barriers.[/quote']

 

Not an idea without merit.

 

However, FoWa seems less powerfull only when campaign point limits are strictly enforced.

 

example:

The early incarnations of Invisible Girl of the Fantastic Four featured far more defensive applications of her 'Invisible Force Fields' than offensive ones. She was the premier non-cosmic 'force manipulator' in the MU. Comparable in some ways to Flash being the premier 'speedster' in the DCU. Invisible Girl would have more points in FoWa than almost any other contemporary character in her universe.

 

Being able to turn off a FoWa and have it completely disapear is no small advantage over Entangle in certain situations. Just because a character can create an Entangle does not, in itself, give him the ability to get rid of it any easier than anybody else.

[Vondy]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

In my FP game we had a long-term character whose primary ability was force walls. The force wall had to be a few body higher than the average dice of attack in the game or it would go down every time it was hit, and it was extemely vulnerable to AP attacks unless it was purchased as hardened. This is one of those powers, if it is to be effective, that has to be carefully tailored to the game you want to run.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

FoWa is all or nothing: it is either a perfect defence or it comes down, and is very little defence at all. FoWa is specifically said to act 'like a real wall' in the description and only fails to do so because of teh lack of BODY.

 

I think zornwil's idea of a single 'barrier' power has merit, although, like armour and force field, there might be enough differences to keep the ability to create a barrier that remains, and the ability to create a barrier you control seperate.

 

Hyper-Man points out that FoWa is limtied when campaign AP limtis are enforced - and it is very true that there are some FoWa constructs that are really useful (I used an energy transparent ont to simulate a character with the ability to cancel inertia, as FoWas cannot push or be pushed) BUT if AP limits are not enforced then presumably there will be enough high level attacks out there to munce FoWas pretty swiftly.

 

The answer is not obvious or easy, but I remain firm in my opinion that a lot of the problems would be mitigated if FoWas had a BODY element.

[SpydirShellX]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

Armor UaA (+1) Use at Range(+1/2) AoE(Line) (+1)

 

Follow the same rule where 1 hex of effect = 3 hexsides. You get a barrier that doesn't go down and blocks anything that gets to it.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

Armor UaA (+1) Use at Range(+1/2) AoE(Line) (+1)

 

Follow the same rule where 1 hex of effect = 3 hexsides. You get a barrier that doesn't go down and blocks anything that gets to it.

 

UaA requires that the power be applied to a target.

 

Using this build to target just a hex instead of an object/character all you end up with is a reinforced area of ground/floor that might support characters with multiple levels of Density Increase/Growth.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

Armor UaA (+1) Use at Range(+1/2) AoE(Line) (+1)

 

Follow the same rule where 1 hex of effect = 3 hexsides. You get a barrier that doesn't go down and blocks anything that gets to it.

 

FoWa works differently to every other defence power in that if you do not exceed the DEF of the wall with the BODY of your attack, NOTHING gets through. Even if your construct created a 'wall', an attack mayy have all the BODY taken out and the STUN reduced, but something would almost certainly still pass through to strike things on the other side, just like any other personal defence. This is why FoWa is so expensive: it is a perfect defence against STUN from attacks, so long as the BODY of the attack is below a certain level.

[JohnTaber]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

This is a great thread guys.

 

One of my issues with the cost is not only the defense gained but the size. Let's take our 60 AP game. For 60 AP they get 12 PD and 12 ED at a size of 1" wide and 1" tall. That is tiny! Let's see...all of these are 60 AP...

 

• 12 PD/ED at 1" x 1"

• 10 PD/ED at 6" x 1" < This would get 1 hex on all sides right...tiny.

• 8 PD/ED at 11" x 1" < Ths is a bit better but if you want to do a globe it is still small. You can do what...2 hexes completely and a teeny bit more. Ouch.

See what I mean?

 

In 4th ed you got a larger size (AP / 5) AND 2 defense. I don't think that is true in 5ER...at least according to the Resource Kit...I don't have my book at work.

[zornwil]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

Yeah, I assume some significant collection of people found FoWa a problem in 4th, but I didn't. I don't even recall it being brought up that often.

[zornwil]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

Although maybe FoWa just got some more utility

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1185093&postcount=80

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1185289&postcount=90

[Vondy]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

Yeah' date=' I assume some significant collection of people found FoWa a problem in 4th, but I didn't. I don't even recall it being brought up that often.[/quote']

 

My problem was cost as it pertained to effect. Implementation, however, was never really a problem. You just had to know how strong it had to be to make it effective in the game you were going to be in - and then be willing to pay for it.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

Armor UaA (+1) Use at Range(+1/2) AoE(Line) (+1)

 

Follow the same rule where 1 hex of effect = 3 hexsides. You get a barrier that doesn't go down and blocks anything that gets to it.

 

this construct won't stop me from stepping through the 'wall' then shooting you.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

This is a great thread guys.

 

One of my issues with the cost is not only the defense gained but the size. Let's take our 60 AP game. For 60 AP they get 12 PD and 12 ED at a size of 1" wide and 1" tall. That is tiny! Let's see...all of these are 60 AP...

 

• 12 PD/ED at 1" x 1"

• 10 PD/ED at 6" x 1" < This would get 1 hex on all sides right...tiny.

• 8 PD/ED at 11" x 1" < Ths is a bit better but if you want to do a globe it is still small. You can do what...2 hexes completely and a teeny bit more. Ouch.

See what I mean?

 

In 4th ed you got a larger size (AP / 5) AND 2 defense. I don't think that is true in 5ER...at least according to the Resource Kit...I don't have my book at work.

 

 

I agree that this does make it less useful than it was BUT it does make the power more customiseable and so more useful as a tool and is therefore more in accordance with the 5th ed philosophy.

 

Bear in mind that as a constant power you can put up more than one FoWa if you want to, and can afford the endurance, so even without spending extra points on area, if you have 0 END you can eventually build a very large wall indeed.

 

ASIDE: one problem with FoWa is 'stacking' i.e. having several walls behind each other to increase protection. I get round this by saying that instances of FoWa generated by the same character are 'the same FoWa' i.e if one breaks they all break. You can get around this by a custom advantage: for =1/2 you can have double the number of FoWas active independently, which you can stack if you want to.

 

I do think that the overall cost of FoWa is high for the utility, but it is more efficient with certain powers, for instance telekinesis, which is already indirect enough to be used through a FoWa - because one of the hidden costs of FoWa is that you cannot use most of your own powers (or even your own strength) through it. I'm going to refer you the the 'add cheap BODY' option: I'm pretty sure that solves everything. Need to consider how you 'regenerate' lost BODY, or even whether you can, but other than that it is good to go.

[zornwil]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

How does it really make it more customizeable, though? It allows you to discretely identify number of hexsides, but that's more a question of granularity. The older FoWa may not have had specific provisions to increase its size but I think the regular area increase Advantage suffices for that. So I don't think it really increased its flexibility meaningfully, just made it cost more.

[Vondy]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

I agree that this does make it less useful than it was BUT it does make the power more customiseable and so more useful as a tool and is therefore more in accordance with the 5th ed philosophy.

 

Did you just sum up 5th Edition as being "more customizable; less useful!" ?

 

I think you just identified my fundamental unease with the current Hero-Think like a bolt of greased lightning.

 

Von "wonders how lightning can be greased" D-Man

[Vondy]

Re: Force Wall Modification

 

How does it really make it more customizeable' date=' though? It allows you to discretely identify number of hexsides, but that's more a question of granularity. The older FoWa may not have had specific provisions to increase its size but I think the regular area increase Advantage suffices for that. So I don't think it really increased its flexibility meaningfully, just made it cost more.[/quote']

 

New Hero Pitch: "More crunch; less punch!"

 

I still love Hero, but this is, essentially, my big problem with the current edition. I need more to do less.