Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

[casualplayer]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Didn't Extra Limbs used to actually have a substantive effect back in the day? Seems I recall it cost 5 pts for each doubling of limbs and gave an OCV bonus for each level. Now Extra Limbs is just a vestigial power left over from editions past.

 

BTW, shouldn't Wings be Inherent? Extra sensory organs? Most SFXs of Regeneration? Teeth and claws?

[schir1964]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

The words "in my opinion" would be what I think you're missing.

No, it is not missing. I was asking for you to provide evidence that would convince me that Extra Limbs is unique enough mechanically to be listed as a separate power. I gave my reasons why I didn't "think" it should be.

 

For 5 points' date=' the character shouldn't expect a lot of benefits from the advantage. In most games I've seen, a character who is Grabbed (and lacks extra limbs) does not have the option of Striking the person who grabbed him, or anyone else.[/quote']

Well, if that's your house rule, then obviously you've just created situation where Extra Limbs has a benefit. However, the rules don't support that interpretation. In fact, they give specific rules on how the grabbed character may attack the grabber. There is also a special note about grabbing a character with one hand (penalty of -5 STR only) and using the other to attack normally, just as you describe for Extra Limbs. So the slight advantage you get with Extra Limbs easily falls within SFX territory, in my opinion.

 

A person in a bear hug will have a tough time inflicting a full STR head butt' date=' and is too close for a very effective kick, or so it is generally assumed.[/quote']

Who said anything about a Bear Hug? A Grab by default is not a Bear Hug, although a Bear Hug would imobilize both arms and qualify as a grab, but with a Bear Hug, both characters would be resticted from attacking each other normally (the grabber always has the squeeze option, but normal strikes would be ruled out due to the nature of the bear hug) regardless of the number of Extra Limbs.

 

A person with extra limbs' date=' on the other hand, can make an effectie Strike against the person grabbing him. That is a mechanical advantage.[/quote']

Not true with a Bear Hug.

Also note that you can do the same thing with two limbs at a slight penalty to STR for the Grab portion.

The mechnical advantage you refer to is small enough to be considered SFX, in my opinion.

 

Can the same advantage be purchased a different way? Sure. If all abilities should be streamlined to one mechanic' date=' we need to ditch two of Force Field, Armor and PD+ED+Damage Resistance - they all do the same thing.[/quote']

The same type of manuever can be achieved without purchasing anything, as descibed above.

 

However, my main point was this. Extra Limbs has been so restricted from granting any ability that would step on the toes of other mechanics, that it is little more than SFX as far as effect.

 

Logically, Extra Limibs should grant you multiple attacks inherently (since you get the full STR with all of them by default).

Logically, Extra Limbs should grant you multiple independent grabs.

Logically, Extra Limbs should increase your Lifting capability.

 

Just My Own Thoughts

 

PS: I'm done sidetracking this thread. Sorry Sean. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

BTW' date=' shouldn't Wings be Inherent? Extra sensory organs? Most SFXs of Regeneration? Teeth and claws?[/quote']

Wings (SFX) is inherent, but the power it grants, Flight (Mechanic), is not.

 

Additonal Eyes (SFX) is inherent, but the power it grants, 360 Degree Sight (Mechanic), is not.

 

Regeneration might be a good candidate for Inherent, but I don't know what SFX an Adjustment Power would have to justify affecting Regeneration. The same could be said for the others I suppose.

 

Teeth and Claws.... same answer as the others.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Sundog]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I use Inherent on my Ninja Hero character - 1 Level of DCV, inherent, because she is small. I thnk that's the kind of thing Inherent is supposed to cover.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Having one's arms pinned doesn't prevent someone from using thier Full strength against the attacker. Unless you are suggesting thier legs and head is pinned also. So effectively, this particular aspect can easily be accomplished by the skill Hogtie, or a more bust version would be entangle.

 

Now let's see if we can accomplish the same thing with other powers mechanically:

Entangle: SFX multiple arms

Stretching: SFX Multiple arms

Growth: SFX Single hand growth only to grab character, other hand pummels

Skill: One arm/hand grabs target pinning the character, the other hand pummels.

 

Standard Ability by everyone: Grab character pinning arms, use STR for damage.

 

Mechanically, there is very little difference as far as the results.

 

The only thing I could find that was mechanically specific to Extra Limbs is a free combat bonus due to SFX/Surprise. Free Combat Bonus can be achieved by inventive thinking on the players part and not worth enough to be mechanic on its own.

 

Hugh, this alone is not unique enough to be considered its own mechanic.

Is there something else I'm missing?

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

 

Being pinned certainly does prevent you using your full strength against an attacker but it is mechanically messy to simulate this by reducing the effective strength of the defender so we do it by increasing the effective strength of the attacker, at least in martial grappling. The rather schizophrenic relationship in Hero between strength and effect (exponential/linear) is one more demonstrated here: does adding +10 STR to hold to the oppponent mean that you can only appply a quarter of your effective strength or doe sthe proportion have to be calculated fromt eh strength you start with (i.e. if you are 20 STR abnd the grappling opponent is also 20 str and adds +10 for the martial grapple, what effect has that had?)

 

Whilst I appreachiate your take on this, Christopher, extra limbs is a seperate power. Even if it does not add a great deal mechanically. I mean, to bind all an opponent's limbs, a normal human would probably need to use all of theirs. Someone with four extra limbs could effectively bind all of TWO opponents' limbs. That seems like a mechanical difference to me, albeit one that probably is not even worth 5 points.

 

Extra limbs increases your ability to manipulate objects, which is not something that you can easily do any other way in the system.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I use Inherent on my Ninja Hero character - 1 Level of DCV' date=' inherent, because she is small. I thnk that's the kind of thing Inherent is supposed to cover.[/quote']

 

Perfect example - inherent covers something the character IS, not something they DO - in this case they are small and harder to hit because of it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Wings (SFX) is inherent, but the power it grants, Flight (Mechanic), is not.

 

Additonal Eyes (SFX) is inherent, but the power it grants, 360 Degree Sight (Mechanic), is not.

 

Regeneration might be a good candidate for Inherent, but I don't know what SFX an Adjustment Power would have to justify affecting Regeneration. The same could be said for the others I suppose.

 

Teeth and Claws.... same answer as the others.

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Arguable extra senses could logically be bought as inherent as 'normal senses' are effectively inherent. Does not stop normal sense affecting powers working.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

No' date=' it is not missing. I was asking for you to provide evidence that would convince me that Extra Limbs is unique enough mechanically to be listed as a separate power. I gave my reasons why I didn't "think" it should be.[/quote']

 

That all sounds like opinion to me, so I think we're just into semantics.

 

 

Well' date=' if that's your house rule, then obviously you've just created situation where Extra Limbs has a benefit. However, the rules don't support that interpretation. In fact, they give specific rules on how the grabbed character may attack the grabber. There is also a special note about grabbing a character with one hand (penalty of -5 STR only) and using the other to attack normally, just as you describe for Extra Limbs. So the slight advantage you get with Extra Limbs easily falls within SFX territory, in my opinion.[/quote']

 

So you don't see being able to hold on with both hands (thus no -5 to STR for the Grab) and still strike with a third being a mechanical advantage over being required to take a -5 penalty to Grab strength in order to be able to Strike with your other arm? It seems to me that it would be appropriate to have a character wanting that advantage pay points for this extra STR usable only for a specific purpose.

 

Who said anything about a Bear Hug? A Grab by default is not a Bear Hug' date=' although a Bear Hug would imobilize both arms and qualify as a grab, but with a Bear Hug, both characters would be resticted from attacking each other normally (the grabber always has the squeeze option, but normal strikes would be ruled out due to the nature of the bear hug) regardless of the number of Extra Limbs.[/quote']

 

If you Grab with two manipulatory limbs and you don't have Extra Limbs, you can't use a third limb to do something a manipulatory limb could not. Neither do the rules allow you to Grab your opponent with your feet and still have your hands free. Extra Limbs adds these options without a penalty to the Grab. Regardless of whether that Grab is a bear hug or some other SFX.

 

Logically' date=' Extra Limibs should grant you multiple attacks inherently (since you get the full STR with all of them by default).[/quote']

 

Why? You have two arms now, and you get one attack, not two, per phase. Just having the limbs doesn't mean you can effectively co-ordinate them independently. And extra attacks would cost more than 5 points, in my view.

 

Logically' date=' Extra Limbs should grant you multiple independent grabs.[/quote']

 

As a subset of "extra attacks", see above. I would allow a four armed haracter to use two arms to Grab one target, and the second set to Grab a second target. A two armed character wishing to do so would have to hold each target with one limb, taking a -5 STR penalty against each.

 

Does any creature in nature demonstrate these extra attacks? Do squid and octopi fend off multiple attackers, or capture multiple food sources, at the same time due to their surplus of limbs? In many games, we grant them these multiple atacks, but does reality support this, or is it "gamer artistic license"?

 

Logically' date=' Extra Limbs should increase your Lifting capability.[/quote']

 

They should? Do they make your back and legs stronger so you can support the extra weight? Most lifting injuries are to the back, not the arms, aren't they?

 

There are limits to how far logic can be taken in the game (and they don't just apply to extra limbs).

 

Logically, Extra Limbs should reduce your cardiovascular fitness since your blood has that much further to travel to cirle the body. You paid for extra limbs, not an extra heart And you should need more food to sustain that greater body mass. A similar, but lesser, issue to that which should arise with Growth.

 

Of course, logically, if a human body could effectively support four arms and they would be advantageous, we should have evolved as a four-armed species.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I use Inherent on my Ninja Hero character - 1 Level of DCV' date=' inherent, because she is small. I thnk that's the kind of thing Inherent is supposed to cover.[/quote']

 

Who buys Drain: DCV levels?

 

Keith "solution without a problem" Curtis

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

They should? Do they make your back and legs stronger so you can support the extra weight? Most lifting injuries are to the back, not the arms, aren't they?

 

There are limits to how far logic can be taken in the game (and they don't just apply to extra limbs).

 

Logically, Extra Limbs should reduce your cardiovascular fitness since your blood has that much further to travel to cirle the body. You paid for extra limbs, not an extra heart And you should need more food to sustain that greater body mass. A similar, but lesser, issue to that which should arise with Growth.

 

Of course, logically, if a human body could effectively support four arms and they would be advantageous, we should have evolved as a four-armed species.

 

Wow, there must be half a dozen dead catgirls in here.

 

Keith "think of the catgirls!" Curtis

[schir1964]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Whilst I appreciate your take on this' date=' Christopher, extra limbs is a seperate power. Even if it does not add a great deal mechanically. I mean, to bind all an opponent's limbs, a normal human would probably need to use all of theirs. Someone with four extra limbs could effectively bind all of TWO opponents' limbs. That seems like a mechanical difference to me, albeit one that probably is not even worth 5 points.[/quote']

This is exactly my point. Extra Limbs by itself, not combined with any other power, might be worth 1 or 2 points if it is actually worth anything, which for me falls within the realm of SFX, since you have minor detriments for having Extra Limbs also.

 

I guess I'm having trouble understanding what the real purpose of binding the limbs? Why bind the limbs?

If it's to stop the grabbed person from attacking the grabber, the rules don't support this regardless of the number of Extra Limbs (perhaps it should, but it doesn't.

If it's to control the grabbed person, this isn't any different than a grab with two limbs as opposed to 100 limbs via the mechanics.

If it's to allow the grabber to cause damage to the grabbed, then again, the mechanics make no difference between 1 Limb and 100 Limbs.

 

Extra limbs increases your ability to manipulate objects' date=' which is not something that you can easily do any other way in the system.[/quote']

I respect you opinion Sean, but I have to disagree on two counts here.

 

1) Manipulation isn't really detailed or fleshed out with the Hero System. I had a thread on this one, remember. (8^D)

2) Actually, I think the system does handle the same level of detail with other mechanics as it does with Extra Limbs easily. Examples follow.

 

STR purchased as a power (SFX: Extra Limbs) allows just as much manipulation as your normal two limbs. Agree or Disagree?

 

Telekinesis (SFX: Extra Limbs) allows just as much manipulation as your normal two limbs. Agree or Disagree?

 

As far as how easy it is... well I can see how perhaps Telekinesis may not be as easy to simulate the SFX Extra Limbs, but I don't know why anyone would think STR purchased as a power with SFX Extra Limbs is any more difficult than Extra Limbs.

 

If you disagree, that's fine, I just don't understand it.

 

Perhaps if the system had Limbs as a power which you had to purchase and granted extra STR sort of like how Growth works I could understand the need for it. But I won't derail this thread any further. If you wish, I can start another thread to continue this conversation.

 

All Just My Humble Opinion

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Hugh, I'm not derailing this thread further.

 

But I did want to clarify. The Logic section was based on how the current rules have defined things. The logic was based on the rules state, not SFX.

 

Rules:

Characters with a single arm usually get a STR (mechanic) penalty via a Character Disadvantage.

Extra Limbs are granted Full STR of the character by default.

STR grants increased Lifting capacity.

Thus, Extra Limbs should grant extra Lifting capacity via the mechanics.

 

This is just another one of the restrictions on Extra Limbs that makes no sense.

 

I'm done here.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Who buys Drain: DCV levels?

 

Keith "solution without a problem" Curtis

 

This is Hero, SOMEONE will.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Who buys Drain: DCV levels?

 

Keith "solution without a problem" Curtis

 

Actually to advance a slightly more coherent answer, say the smallness is as a result of a mutation (think Puck from Alpha Flight):

 

The attacker has 'drain mutation' (as a +2 drain power)

 

Now SHOULD the target character suddenly get bigger (well it happened in Alpha Flight) or not - is the root CAUSE of the smallness a mutation, but it is not a mutant power that is keeping the character small - it is the effect of mutation over many years of development. If the latter, it makes no sense for the character to suddenly grow and so lose their DCV level.

 

So even defining drain against sfx is not going to necessarily eliminate the need for 'inherent'.

 

If the character is kept small by a mutation then your very sensible approach works, if not then....well, you could use GM fiat (the mutation made him small but he is not actually KEPT small by the mutation) and just guess OR you could actually have bought it that way in the first place.

 

The point I make - and this really is the point you will need to address if you want to convicne me - is that WITHOUT inherent, any power drain makes the character more like the 'human' base template. What f they are not like that 'naturally'?

 

This goes on to another level, of course, at a pure 'cost' level: if one character effectively CANNOT be drained of their +1 DCV level, and another CAN, should the first character have paid more?

 

I'd say yes.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Actually Puck's smallness may have been as a result of magic, but the principle still applies.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Not sure I parsed all that correctly, but here is my take:

 

OPTION 1

The mutation keeps him small and the root cause of the +1DCV is the smallness.

Drain: Mutant Powers drains the level. He grows to normal size.

 

OPTION 2

The mutation kept him from growing, and the root cause of the +1DCV is the natural smallness.

Drain: Mutant Powers does not drain the level. Neither does he grow to normal size.

 

The power Drain is Drain: Mutant Powers, not Drain: every implication of mutant powers.

 

The point I make - and this really is the point you will need to address if you want to convicne me - is that WITHOUT inherent, any power drain makes the character more like the 'human' base template. What f they are not like that 'naturally'?

Alternatively, you could say any poorly worded or defined power drain makes the character more like the 'human' base template. Note that neither of the solutions I posited above requires Inherent. Neither requires the character with the DCV level to buy his powers any differently. The wording of the Drain determines the vulnearbility of the level from being drained.

 

This goes on to another level, of course, at a pure 'cost' level: if one character effectively CANNOT be drained of their +1 DCV level, and another CAN, should the first character have paid more?

The question is loaded. It's not a matter of a character having a level that cannot be drained, its a matter of defining the Drain properly. In the case of Puck, whose height was magically suppressed (yuck), then Drain: Magic Energy should take the level. If it's merely an effect of being naturally short, then an attacker will have to come up with some rationale (which escapes me) for defining a character that can drain it.

In other words, I'm not going to cause characters with Ice Powers to spend more for their powers simply because every attacker buys Drain: Fire Powers.

 

Keith "Not trying to convince you, but the conversation doesn't seem to be dying" Curtis

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

In your game you use careful definition to regulate drains, but that is not how the rules are written, and there are any number of 'official' characters with poorly defined adjustment powers. If you could re-write the rules to make more logical sense we may not need inherent. Until they are re-written, I think it has a place.

[Vondy]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Who buys Drain: DCV levels?

 

Keith "solution without a problem" Curtis

 

Someone in a kung-fu action campaign who wants to build a character who mail ordered Learn-The-Mighty-Fighting-Techniques-Of-The-Dragon-Society-In-Just-Three-Weeks that includes the bonus chapter "cut through your opponents defensive techniques like a hot knife through butter?" And in response, as a justification for DCV Levels Inherent, a couch potato watching infomertials who was conned into ordering "Uber-Secret Techniques of the Ancient One " that renders the Dragon Society's kung-fu miserably weak. Even though I don't care for Inherent much, or that style of character build (I do grittier heroic games), I don't think such a drain is as "out there" as you are making it out to be.

 

Von "a time and a place for everything" D-Man

[zornwil]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

In your game you use careful definition to regulate drains' date=' but that is not how the rules are written, and there are any number of 'official' characters with poorly defined adjustment powers. If you could re-write the rules to make more logical sense we may not need inherent. Until they are re-written, I think it has a place.[/quote']

I'm a bit confused by your comment "you use careful definition to regulate drains, but that is not how the rules are written." How are the rules not supportive of "careful definition"? Especially given comments on SFX and so on?

 

I don't disagree re standard write-ups, but that's a different problem, and by itself doesn't really go against the necessity in a complex system to define SFX carefully, which HERO might not be so clear on but does make some mention of. And this is true of any similar system, by which I mean any system that is or attempts to be "SFX-agnostic," whether HERO or Dogs in the Vineyard.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Someone in a kung-fu action campaign who wants to build a character who mail ordered Learn-The-Mighty-Fighting-Techniques-Of-The-Dragon-Society-In-Just-Three-Weeks that includes the bonus chapter "cut through your opponents defensive techniques like a hot knife through butter?" And in response, as a justification for DCV Levels Inherent, a couch potato watching infomertials who was conned into ordering "Uber-Secret Techniques of the Ancient One " that renders the Dragon Society's kung-fu miserably weak. Even though I don't care for Inherent much, or that style of character build (I do grittier heroic games), I don't think such a drain is as "out there" as you are making it out to be.

 

Von "a time and a place for everything" D-Man

This requires a drain? Why not some skill levels? Much, much simpler.

 

Keith "simpleton" Curtis

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

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

 

I guess I'm having trouble understanding what the real purpose of binding the limbs? Why bind the limbs?

If it's to stop the grabbed person from attacking the grabber, the rules don't support this regardless of the number of Extra Limbs (perhaps it should, but it doesn't.

If it's to control the grabbed person, this isn't any different than a grab with two limbs as opposed to 100 limbs via the mechanics.

If it's to allow the grabber to cause damage to the grabbed, then again, the mechanics make no difference between 1 Limb and 100 Limbs.

 

 

I respect you opinion Sean, but I have to disagree on two counts here.

 

1) Manipulation isn't really detailed or fleshed out with the Hero System. I had a thread on this one, remember. (8^D)

2) Actually, I think the system does handle the same level of detail with other mechanics as it does with Extra Limbs easily. Examples follow.

 

STR purchased as a power (SFX: Extra Limbs) allows just as much manipulation as your normal two limbs. Agree or Disagree?

 

Telekinesis (SFX: Extra Limbs) allows just as much manipulation as your normal two limbs. Agree or Disagree?

 

As far as how easy it is... well I can see how perhaps Telekinesis may not be as easy to simulate the SFX Extra Limbs, but I don't know why anyone would think STR purchased as a power with SFX Extra Limbs is any more difficult than Extra Limbs.

 

If you disagree, that's fine, I just don't understand it.

 

Perhaps if the system had Limbs as a power which you had to purchase and granted extra STR sort of like how Growth works I could understand the need for it. But I won't derail this thread any further. If you wish, I can start another thread to continue this conversation.

 

All Just My Humble Opinion

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Character A has a normal compliment of limbs and , let us say, prehensile feet, something he can have for free in Hero as it has so little game effect, but which is potentially useful in some situations.

 

Character B has 10 arms, bought with the 'extra limbs' power.

 

Character A could, at best, grab 4 opponents and headbut either one of them or someone else.

 

Character B could potentially grab 10 opponents, plus whatever he manages to get with his feet, and still has his head handy.

 

If you are fighting minions, having lots of extra limbs can be useful. Think grab-by or sweep grab. Or human shield if you are a villian.

 

Of course you COULD just buy extra limbs as extra strength and call it SFX, but to do that you would have a character that cannot actually grab more opponents than a normal human.

 

Arguably 5 points is too much for the utility, but it is a discernable effect that cannot be replicated with other powers, and the cost, being relatively insignificant, does not bother me.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

In your game you use careful definition to regulate drains' date=' but that is not how the rules are written, and there are any number of 'official' characters with poorly defined adjustment powers. If you could re-write the rules to make more logical sense we may not need inherent. Until they are re-written, I think it has a place.[/quote']

 

There are any number of 'official' characters with poorly defined powers, period.

And the rules are written that way, IMHO. That is where SFX, Common Sense, Dramatic Need and Game Balance are needed. Look at the number of times these phrases are used in the rulebook. There's a reason they are there.

You are free to interpret the rules however you wish, as am I. But to claim that they support one style of play officially is a bit overmuch, methinks.

 

Finally, you might remember that early in this discussion I stated that there are times when Inherent might be valid. I just don't see them too often. So far the Fire Elemental example has come the closest, but even there, it would depend on a lot of campaign specifics.

 

Keith "YMMV" Curtis

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

There are any number of 'official' characters with poorly defined powers, period.

And the rules are written that way, IMHO. That is where SFX, Common Sense, Dramatic Need and Game Balance are needed. Look at the number of times these phrases are used in the rulebook. There's a reason they are there.

You are free to interpret the rules however you wish, as am I. But to claim that they support one style of play officially is a bit overmuch, methinks.

 

Finally, you might remember that early in this discussion I stated that there are times when Inherent might be valid. I just don't see them too often. So far the Fire Elemental example has come the closest, but even there, it would depend on a lot of campaign specifics.

 

Keith "YMMV" Curtis

 

I still see cost as a problem: someone magically shrunk getting bonuses for that can have the shrunkenness and the bonuses taken away. Someone naturally short and getting bonuses for that can't.

 

I'm having difficulty seeing why the second character is not getting a more useful power. In a game where magic sfx are common, the character could be losing his DCV bonus every few sessions. That being the case the second power should cost more, and inherent is a way to make it cost more that seems to fit the bill. If you don't like 'inherent' then you can change the label, but it should still, IMO, be a more expensive power.

 

Now I do like the approach you espouse, if I have it aright. Basically that adjustment powers should always be targetted on sfx rather than on powers. This means that it is nice and logical as to when they work and when they don't. I'd be interested to know how you handle power defence.

 

I do see some problems with the approach though. Although theoretically having a particular sfx for a power has both advantages (aid powers help it) and limtiations (drain powers remove it) that balance, realistically, unless you have an appropriate aider in your Hero group, you will get hit by drains far more often. Given that this is the case, picking a really esoteric sfx is an advantage - you are rarely going to encounter a drain that works against it. Quabnabita powers. Go figure.

 

The problem is not with the idea which, as I have said, I like, it is with the way in which Hero seperates sfx and powers: there could and should be far better integration. This is difficult because Hero is a generic system, but there could, for instance, be an advantage applied if the power uses uncommon sfx as it is less likely to be affected by adjustment powers.

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I still see cost as a problem: someone magically shrunk getting bonuses for that can have the shrunkenness and the bonuses taken away. Someone naturally short and getting bonuses for that can't.

 

I'm having difficulty seeing why the second character is not getting a more useful power.

In a game where people are buying powers based on their mechanical usefulness against other powers, this could indeed be a problem. I haven't run into it since I stopped playing Champions and started concentrating on other genres. Where there is less of an "anything goes" attitude, SFX and game rationale for powers becomes far more prominent and important. I would never let anybody buy Drain: DCV level, because it doesn't make sense. Even Drain: Magical Energy is too broad for any useful application.

In a game where magic sfx are common' date=' the character could be losing his DCV bonus every few sessions. That being the case the second power should cost more, and inherent is a way to make it cost more that seems to fit the bill. If you don't like 'inherent' then you can change the label, but it should still, IMO, be a more expensive power.[/quote']

If you buy Inherent, but no one buys the particular type of drain that would affect you, then the second power is more expensive for no reason. Should a player be forced to spend more points for something that is essentially an SFX that has no game utility?

Now I do like the approach you espouse, if I have it aright. Basically that adjustment powers should always be targetted on sfx rather than on powers. This means that it is nice and logical as to when they work and when they don't. I'd be interested to know how you handle power defence.

You probably won't be surprised to know that I am in the camp of those who intensely dislike Power Defense. It is purely a game mechanic that has no in game rationale. (Like the old can't teleport through hardened defenses, so buy Armor Piercing rules). It exists to counter such a wide variety of powers that it is essentially meaningless. My Power Defense (and how does your character refer to this defense?) protects equally against Rattlesnake venom, A disorientation ray (Drain Dex), A frictionless field (Drain Movement) and a Suppress Magic Field (Drain: Magical Powers (+2))?

The usual examples trotted out to show a universal Power Defense involve some sort of cosmic or godlike being who is just "immune from someone trying to make him not like himself." Bleh.

In my Savage Earth game, I have a wide variety of powers simulating a single SFX (altering things to make them more or less like other things). Where possible, I try to have the same defense for every power. In this case, I chose Mental Defense, since the SFX for resisting is willpower, your desire to remain as you are. It made more sense to me than using Power Defense for this application, Mental Defense for that one and so forth. Especially, since the various powers are all applications of the same "meta-power" that simply require different mechanical constructions to model.

 

I do see some problems with the approach though. Although theoretically having a particular sfx for a power has both advantages (aid powers help it) and limtiations (drain powers remove it) that balance, realistically, unless you have an appropriate aider in your Hero group, you will get hit by drains far more often. Given that this is the case, picking a really esoteric sfx is an advantage - you are rarely going to encounter a drain that works against it. Quabnabita powers. Go figure.

I, as a GM, would never allow this type of player chicanery.

 

The problem is not with the idea which, as I have said, I like, it is with the way in which Hero seperates sfx and powers: there could and should be far better integration. This is difficult because Hero is a generic system, but there could, for instance, be an advantage applied if the power uses uncommon sfx as it is less likely to be affected by adjustment powers.

As stated above, I prefer to limit the adjusment power appropriately than to increase the cost of the Defense.

 

Keith "Different approaches" Curtis

[Vondy]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

This requires a drain? Why not some skill levels? Much, much simpler.

 

Keith "simpleton" Curtis

 

Its not how I build characters - I too prefer simple solutions - but I've seen many characters (official and otherwise) that make use of these kinds of builds and I consider them perfectly valid ways to model certain effects.