Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

[Robyn]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

FYI, Keith - the Reply With Quote put all your text in one large paragraph, as if you had not used any line returns. This might be just me (I tried reloading the page several times, no change), but if something went wrong when you posted, an edit would make future replies a lot easier

 

Well from a rules standpoint' date=' everything is an offshoot of the human template to some degree. Even vehicles and robots. They have to buy abilities that humans do not have. There are exceptions, but this is the general philosophy.[/quote']

 

This is one of the reasons why figuring out the underpinnings of that human template is so important. The cost of Inherent abilities could then be balanced between templates.

 

I never advocated letting SFX replace the rules. I said they should dictate a logical build.

 

I agree with you quite strongly on this. You can see my system for applying this theory on the suffocation thread.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I might be phenomenally lucky' date=' but the gamers I have gamed with have by and large been easily this responsible. YMMV[/quote']

 

Perhaps 'responsible' was the wrong word. Consistent and foresighted would probably be better

 

Not at all. I advocate the simplest build which requires the least number of characters to be whacked for extra points. For example. Turrn Undead. I dislike clerics having to buy a clunky Extra PRE only to send away undead. Buy the Undead with a VULN to PRE attacks from holy people or symbols. Don't buy a church with some weird invisible forcefield that only affects undead. Buy your undead with a PHYS LIM: Cannot enter hallowed ground. Both of these require an alteration to defenses or limitations' date=' not an attack power. In short, Keep it Simple.[/quote']

 

This is very sensible gaming and requires what Hero specifically does not do, being a generic system, which is set up a plan in advance for character builds. A GM setting build limtis for characters and his own NPCs can make life so much easier, but when discussing the system as a whole I stick by my point (with a small modification) that the advocated approach is ALLOWED by Hero but it is not part of the Hero philosophy.

 

Personally I do not see inherent as a 'clunky' advantage - it does what it says on the tin in a very straightforward way as far as I can make out.

 

 

Well from a rules standpoint' date=' everything is an offshoot of the human template to some degree. Even vehicles and robots. They have to buy abilities that humans do not have. There are exceptions, but this is the general philosophy.[/quote']

 

You are quite right, everything is an offshoot of the Human Template. It is just that I see 'inherent' as a tool for modifying that template ina a way that other advantages simply can't.

 

 

 

One thing I didn't say earlier was that I felt the entire Drain power to be cheesy to begin with, but that was the example provided. I would never build it that way, but instead use an appropriate NND. This would circumvent the requirement for inherent in this case. I am sure that we could find one that I would agre is legitimate, but it's likely a vanishingly small number of cases.You are assuming a lot here. I never said that I assume anyone uses Inherent for everything. Merely that I find it generally superfluous and clunky. I'm paraphrasing myself here, for brevity.I never advocated letting SFX replace the rules. I said they should dictate a logical build. I do modify some interactions based on SFX, but not often or by much, depending on the genre. I would als argue that buying all of the Life Supports inherent to a sentient rock with the Inherent Advantage is expensive in the extreme in fifth edition.Don't need to ban it. We just don't use it. It has literally never, ever come up.I can point you to numerous post on this board upon which I have stated my dislike for universal Power Defense. Here we can easily agree.

 

Keith "Setting it straight" Curtis

 

I think all adjustment powers need excellent build definition, and sfx are an important part of that definition, supporting but not replacing advantages and limtiations. Here we certainly agree.

 

Modifying a human template is probably not cheap, if you make inherent all the things a sentient rock should 'be' but that is because you cannot balance the cost with things that the sentient rock IS NOT as the Human Template is mechanically opaque - you can use disadvantages but that does not help that much - you simply do not have as many points to spend on powers if you have to scrap normal sight using an advantage and replace it with some other targetting sense (perhaps some sort of magnetically based spacial awareness). The cost does not come from 'inherent' though, it comes from the lack of access to the underlying game structure.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Personally I do not see inherent as a 'clunky' advantage - it does what it says on the tin in a very straightforward way as far as I can make out.

 

By clunky, I mean it solves a problem that by and large for me does not exist. It adds unnecessary cost if improperly or inconsistently applied. In my experience, this is most uses. Your games undoubtedly differ.

 

Keith "YMMV" Curtis

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

FYI' date=' Keith - the Reply With Quote put all your text in one large paragraph, as if you had not used any line returns. This might be just me (I tried reloading the page several times, no change), but if something went wrong when you posted, an edit would make future replies a lot easier [/quote']

 

I have noticed that ever since the upgrade there have been occasional weirdnesses with upper byte characters. I hadn't seen the return problem. I composed the reply in an offline text editor, and it might have used an unexpected return character. I'll keep a closer eye on it.

 

Keith "One universal character set would be nice" Curtis

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

By clunky, I mean it solves a problem that by and large for me does not exist. It adds unnecessary cost if improperly or inconsistently applied. In my experience, this is most uses. Your games undoubtedly differ.

 

Keith "YMMV" Curtis

 

But Keith, my boy, you play the game with foresight, consistency and responsibility. We don't need strictly defined parameters for people like you or, apparently those you play with.

 

Not one munchkin? Ever?

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

 

Not in a long time. I have players with problems, and even occasionally a couple of power builders, but it's all relative. I haven't had anyone try to really rape the rules in over 20 years.

 

Keith "People wonder why I whined and cried about leaving my gaming group" Curtis

[Lucius]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I like Steve's answer to Lucius' question over in Hero System 5th Edition Rules Questions!

 

That was obviously a popular answer.

 

I'm afraid I don't think I quite understand it.

 

First he says Life Support is Persistant, but NOT Inherent.

 

Then he seems to imply that "common sense" would forbid ever removing it with a Drain, etc. - which basically is saying that it IS automatically Inherent and immune to such effects.

 

Mind you, I have no problem with considering it Inherent - I've already expressed the opinion that "Drain Life Support" like "Drain Skills" is too much power for too little points - but I guess what I don't understand is saying it's NOT Inherent. If it basically gets the benefits of Inherent, in what sense isn't it Inherent?

 

Lucius P. Alexander

 

Buying an Inherent Palindromedary

[Robyn]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I guess what I don't understand is saying it's NOT Inherent. If it basically gets the benefits of Inherent' date=' in what sense isn't it Inherent?[/quote']

 

In the sense that nobody has to pay points for it?

 

I wonder if he's trying to give us the best of both worlds: point balance, and common sense.

[Hoovdog]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

In the sense that nobody has to pay points for it?

 

I wonder if he's trying to give us the best of both worlds: point balance, and common sense.

 

 

If the person who writes the rules also defines the point cost then it could inhernt could be built in with no cost to the charecter because the power is by defentoin Inherent.

[Robyn]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

If the person who writes the rules also defines the point cost then it could inhernt could be built in with no cost to the charecter because the power is by defentoin Inherent.

 

But that's not what he said - he said it didn't have Inherent, not that it did but with no cost.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

..................

 

Mind you, I have no problem with considering it Inherent - I've already expressed the opinion that "Drain Life Support" like "Drain Skills" is too much power for too little points - but I guess what I don't understand is saying it's NOT Inherent. If it basically gets the benefits of Inherent, in what sense isn't it Inherent?

 

Lucius P. Alexander

 

Buying an Inherent Palindromedary

 

By the same token then, if being able to REMOVE life support cheaply is too much utility, then it is because the powers themselves are so cheap that draining them is so easy, so perhaps life support should cost more?

 

Just saying

[braincraft]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I just want to know what would be the logical justification for Drain: Desolidification or Drain: Extra limb? I think the whole inherent question can be eliminated in nearly every case by a gm who enforces reasonable Drains.

 

Keith "common sense-er" Curtis

 

A De-Evolution Ray defined as a Drain on all powers based on race? It would also mess up mutants, I guess.

 

I'm sure there's all sorts of ghostbusting equipment that could Drain or Supress Desolid, like an ectoreactive foam that calcifies spectral forms, or a dimensional breach spell that thins the wall between the realm of the dead and the realm of the living, making it possible for spirits and men to interact (would be a ton cheaper than buying a naked Affects Desolid Usable By Others!)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

A De-Evolution Ray defined as a Drain on all powers based on race? It would also mess up mutants, I guess.

 

...yes, well, it depends what you point it at. I mean, you REALLY don't want to go pointing it at budgies.

 

(and I'll be quite impressed if anyone knows what THAT is a reference to )

[Teflon Billy]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Inherent, IMO, works great for making Characters that have some sort of Cosmic Being. That is they are imutable in certain Foundations of the Universe kind of ways.

 

TB

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

First he says Life Support is Persistant, but NOT Inherent.

 

Then he seems to imply that "common sense" would forbid ever removing it with a Drain, etc. - which basically is saying that it IS automatically Inherent and immune to such effects.

 

The precedent for such a structure seems to be Telekinesis, which isn't Indirect, but shares a number of effects of Indirect. A Rules Question post some time ago indicated that there was nothing Steve could think of which an Indirect (+3/4) power could accomplish that could not be achieved by Telekinesis. To me, that begged the question "Why not reduce the cost and make it Direct by default?"

 

Similarly, it makes no sense to me that Aid costs no END by default, but Healing costs END by default. The only reason I can see is that Aid was considered underpriced at 5 points per die, but overpriced at 10,and pisking a point in between was perceived as less desirable than building in an advantage and pricing it at a breakpoint evenly divisible by 5.

[Vondy]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I might be phenomenally lucky' date=' but the gamers I have gamed with have by and large been easily this responsible.[/quote']

 

I've seen both ends of the spectrum. I also think birds of a feather flock together. My last group developed its own internally responsible zeitgeist that pervaded play, and as a result, problems seldom cropped up, and were handled in an amiable way when they did. Also, the gravely sober and responsible (ahem....) silent cues given off to newcomers (read: overriding moral gravity and outright and peer pressure) seemed to curb newbie excesses before they began. I too have been, for the most part, very lucky. On the other-hand, I developed my style after - and perhaps in reaction to - having been exposed to some world class munchkins and powergamers, so I can definately understand the concern that someone out there will assume the GM is an idiot and try to slide these little system-breakers through the gauntlet.

[Wolfgar]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

A de-evolution ray would be a Transform, not a Drain.

 

Life Support should not normally be the target of Adjustment powers by itself, largely because it makes no sense. Most variants of a power that do so would be beter represented with an Attack power.

 

Life Support as a power should still be affectable by an Adjustment power that focuses on a large group of powers, such as an anti-magic Suppress vs. Underwater Breathing, or a technology-scrambling Drain on a characters Power Armor LS systems.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I just want to know what would be the logical justification for Drain: Desolidification or Drain: Extra limb? I think the whole inherent question can be eliminated in nearly every case by a gm who enforces reasonable Drains.

 

Keith "common sense-er" Curtis

I agree. I never use Inherent. I prefer common sense.

[Robyn]

But how many points would we charge for it?

 

I agree. I never use Inherent. I prefer common sense.

 

I wonder if we can stat out common sense . . .

[Enforcer84]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I just want to know what would be the logical justification for Drain: Desolidification or Drain: Extra limb? I think the whole inherent question can be eliminated in nearly every case by a gm who enforces reasonable Drains.

 

Keith "common sense-er" Curtis

Wuss.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I use it sparingly I have no problem with it.

[Wolfgar]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

As a side thought, Inherent may be useful for certain artifacts and relics that are in and of themselves magical. I wouldn't do this with your typical run-of-the-mill magic sword, or even most enchanted objects, but for the Ark of the Covenant or Vecna's Left Testicle it's perfect.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

As a side thought' date=' Inherent may be useful for certain artifacts and relics that are in and of themselves magical. I wouldn't do this with your typical run-of-the-mill magic sword, or even most enchanted objects, but for the Ark of the Covenant or Vecna's Left Testicle it's perfect.[/quote']

I dunno, I thought the right was more powerful in magic. The Left Testicle was better at math.

[Sean Waters]

Re: But how many points would we charge for it?

 

I wonder if we can stat out common sense . . .

 

Yep: Common Sense +1/4 When applied to a power that is already 0 END and persistent it prevents the power being affected by adjustment powers. Should only be used when appropriate. AKA Inherent.

[Robyn]

Re: But how many points would we charge for it?

 

Yep: Common Sense +1/4 When applied to a power that is already 0 END and persistent it prevents the power being affected by adjustment powers. Should only be used when appropriate. AKA Inherent.

 

I was thinking more of a general, "cover all bases" build for it. But this will do for now.