Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

[schir1964]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Character A has a normal compliment of limbs and ' date=' 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.[/quote']

You actually highlighted one of the problems with this statement right here. STR doesn't differentiate between hands, feet, or mouth. As far as STR is concerned, they are all have the same manipulation capability. So you don't even have to specify prehensile anything, they get the manipulation for free.

 

Which then begs the question about the Human Template SFX overlay... which is actually never mentioned but heavily implied...

 

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.

Or.... he could grab 5 opponents and squeeze all of them for damage. I know, it would look ridiculous, but that what GM is for. (8^D)

 

On the serious side, if you want to affect multiple targets with EB, RKA, HA, or Entangle, what do you do? Area Effect.

 

Wouldn't applying Area Effect to STR be more consistent with the system than narrowly defined SFX driven power?

 

If you are fighting minions' date=' having lots of extra limbs can be useful. Think grab-by or sweep grab. Or human shield if you are a villian.[/quote']

And what stops a two armed character from doing these same things mechanically with the system?

 

Wouldn't Area Effect applied to any mechanic allow for this?

 

Of course you COULD just buy extra limbs as extra strength and call it SFX' date=' but to do that you would have a character that cannot actually grab more opponents than a normal human.[/quote']

No, that is not what I suggested.

 

I said buy STR as a Power, not limited Extra STR.

 

But the system allows you use multiple STR with only a single cost. Add in the standard Rapid Fire, or Sweep that is there to affect multiple targets/attacks. So the system has all the mechanics you need already to do what you want without Extra Limbs.

 

Maybe I'm myopic, but I just don't see how Extra Limbs has added anything unique mechanic wise. But if you are fine with it then don't worry about what I think. It's your game after all. (8^D)

 

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

Agree: 5 Points is too much for SFX based ability.

Disagree: It has no discernable effect mehanically that isn't already handled by other mechanics. I've already given examples of how you might do it with current mechanics that would be more consistent with the system.

 

Feel Free To Ignore My Opinion

 

- Christopher Mullins (8^D)

[casualplayer]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

On the serious side, if you want to affect multiple targets with EB, RKA, HA, or Entangle, what do you do? Area Effect.

 

Wouldn't applying Area Effect to STR be more consistent with the system than narrowly defined SFX driven power?

 

Good call, Area Effect: Selective on STR would probably represent additional manipulatory limbs better if they are fully usable limbs and a GM handwave would suffice if the additional limbs are minimally useful. Being a modifier it couldn't be Drained but the core STR could be. You might have something there.

[zornwil]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

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' date=' so buy Armor Piercing[/i'] 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))?

 

I got around it by basically defaulting all Adjustment powers to a broad SFX type of "Supernatural" and embedding Supernatural into the system along the exact same lines as Physical, Energy, and Mental.

 

As to another point you made, I think the higher-powered genra (not just supers, but high fantasy, space opera) have built-in balance issues which can never be fully resolved with points. The rulebook should serve as the point to discuss those issues but I don't think it can resolve them (as the full-scale retreat on size characteristics demonstrates).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

You actually highlighted one of the problems with this statement right here. STR doesn't differentiate between hands' date=' feet, or mouth. As far as STR is concerned, they are all have the same manipulation capability. So you don't even have to specify prehensile anything, they get the manipulation for free.[/quote']

 

So in your game characters can Grab with their mouths and their feet. OK. My games assume that a human comes equipped with two arms (manipulatory limbs).

 

On the serious side' date=' if you want to affect multiple targets with EB, RKA, HA, or Entangle, what do you do? Area Effect.[/quote']

 

This assumes I want to affect multiple targets using a single attack roll. I want to be able to Grab a target this phase, maintain my hold on him with both hands, and:

 

(a) Pick up the newspaper so I can read it while he tries to break out.

 

( Pour a glass of milk and drink it while maintaining that hold.

 

© Grab his teammate next phase without loosening my grip on my first target.

 

No one is arguing that Extra Limbs allows you to effect multiple Grabs as a single attack action.

 

Maybe I'm myopic' date=' but I just don't see how Extra Limbs has added anything unique mechanic wise. But if you are fine with it then don't worry about what I think. It's your game after all. (8^D)[/quote']

 

OK - maybe you're myopic.

[TheRavenIs]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

I use Inherent, when I think it's required. The main GN in our group is very careful on how it works, so she made a modification to some of the ways it can be used.

 

All or Nothing: now she does this when the ability is an extra.

Automatic difficult to dispell: this is on things like come from a focus or HIDO, that are intregial to the C.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

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?

 

...and you might invest 5 points in lack of weakness and never have Find Weakness used against you.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

...and you might invest 5 points in lack of weakness and never have Find Weakness used against you.

 

Very true. And isn't having an unusual physical structurfe (a common reason for purchasing LoW) as much "just SFX" as having a couple of extra arms.

[zornwil]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

To be fair, KC's point was centered around a non-possible use of Drain to begin with.

 

That being said, there's a bit of circularity in the air, let's dispel it: the question really isn't "is Inherent useful" so much as "should invulnerability to Adjustment powers exist." To me, the only argument supporting a yes to the latter is the question of interaction of SFX ("you can't drain my limbs, they're part of me"). This is a dangerous path in HERO and even a flimsy one, even if we conclude the necessity is there. I'm really not sure why we don't require additional PowD just as with other constructs along with the normal caveats about SFX interaction. If the SFX "necessity" perceived is the notion that some abilities can be innate, immutable, then I am not sure why we don't fix the real issue of "what is innate to a character" (this is a hotter topic now that the system has declared that any size can be innate and therefore falls outside mechanical interaction. hence the arguments around Extra Limbs).

 

I simply see no issue, especially in the kinds of games that have the situation, with simply saying "Dr. Negato's Drain Appendage Ray can't work against Octoboy's 8 arms because the Drain Appendage Ray reverts an object to its natural state. But Captain Cutlery's Cut-a-Rama Drain DOES work because it is defined to chop off limbs, and the player even has a Transform for the base limbss people have." (yes, I made a simple example, but the GM could just as easily rule either way as makes sense re the Captain if he's defined otherwise)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

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

 

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.

 

 

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

 

Keith "Different approaches" Curtis

 

 

Now we agree that Power Defence makes little sense (and, presumably about my awesome poetic powers

 

However, there are only so many things you can do about that, given the existence of adjustment powers in the game at all. We could just ditch power defence: that would work. We require adjustment powers to be properly defined, so we don't need them: it is obvious if your drain (movement) is defined as a frictionless field then anything that requires friction is not going to work, like normal running, swimming, possibly swinging and leaping, some types of flight etc etc.

 

OK, cool, but what that does, in effect, is change every adjustment attack into NND, and, my bigger concern, means that the same points spent on the same power have different utility, depending on what sfx you pick: drain movement could be defined, for instance as 'air hardening' and then it would effect virtually everything except teleport - more utility than the 'frictionless field, but no difference in cost.

 

The other problem is that is not really scaleable except fromt he attack end - you can't build a power that makes the adjustment power LESS effective - just have a SFX that makes it ineffective.

 

The other alternative would be to substitute a different defence, say flash defence for drain INT, which works by distracting the mind with a pretty lightshow. That is converting all attacks into AVLD for free, but at least it has scaleability.

 

Then you have other problems: four characters have STR 60: the first is a mutant, the second is a demon, the third is a robot and the fourth is a touch telekinetic. When exposed to a strength drain, you apply the SFX: well we have a number of candidates: muscle relaxant gas, for example. Who would that effect? Probably not the robot or the touch telekinetic: what about the demon? Is the mutant's strength actually derived from having mutated musculature or are subtler forces at work - in fact anything he touches has mass and density momentarily drained, giving the effect of massive strength.

 

I don't know many characters who have their characteristics described in enough detail to make that work.

 

So, I come back to my suggestion that it might be nice to talk about SFX/rules interaction in more detail. At present SFX are just a colour wash: there is no reason they cannot be embedded in the system without limiting people's creative freedom. And, as a bonus, it might all make more sense

[keithcurtis]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Now we agree that Power Defence makes little sense (and' date=' presumably about my awesome poetic powers [/quote']

OK, cool, but what that does, in effect, is change every adjustment attack into NND, and, my bigger concern, means that the same points spent on the same power have different utility, depending on what sfx you pick: drain movement could be defined, for instance as 'air hardening' and then it would effect virtually everything except teleport - more utility than the 'frictionless field, but no difference in cost.

 

The other problem is that is not really scaleable except fromt he attack end - you can't build a power that makes the adjustment power LESS effective - just have a SFX that makes it ineffective.

 

The other alternative would be to substitute a different defence, say flash defence for drain INT, which works by distracting the mind with a pretty lightshow. That is converting all attacks into AVLD for free, but at least it has scaleability.

You could combine the two approaches. Have a defensive ability that reduces the effect, and conditions under which it does not work. As for AVLD, anything that affects Power Defense is already essentially AVLD, so I don't see a problem.

 

Then you have other problems: four characters have STR 60: the first is a mutant, the second is a demon, the third is a robot and the fourth is a touch telekinetic. When exposed to a strength drain, you apply the SFX: well we have a number of candidates: muscle relaxant gas, for example. Who would that effect? Probably not the robot or the touch telekinetic: what about the demon? Is the mutant's strength actually derived from having mutated musculature or are subtler forces at work - in fact anything he touches has mass and density momentarily drained, giving the effect of massive strength.

 

I don't know many characters who have their characteristics described in enough detail to make that work.

Most characters in my campaign have origins/powers/abilites/concept whatever well-detailed enough to at least extrapolate. THe above examples suggest a superheroic campaign, which I stated earlier I felt to operate under different assumptions. Champions is much more of a math contest than heroic level campaigns, at least in my personal experience. For Champions, I have less of a beef with Inherent and Power Defense. I still dislike their ubiquitous use, but I can overlook it. After all, Super heroes don't make a lot of rational sense to begin with.

So' date=' I come back to my suggestion that it might be nice to talk about SFX/rules interaction in more detail. At present SFX are just a colour wash: there is no reason they cannot be embedded in the system without limiting people's creative freedom. And, as a bonus, it might all make more sense [/quote']

Agreed.

 

Keith "And that was that" Curtis

[zornwil]

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How?

 

Now we agree that Power Defence makes little sense (and, presumably about my awesome poetic powers

 

However, there are only so many things you can do about that, given the existence of adjustment powers in the game at all. We could just ditch power defence: that would work. We require adjustment powers to be properly defined, so we don't need them: it is obvious if your drain (movement) is defined as a frictionless field then anything that requires friction is not going to work, like normal running, swimming, possibly swinging and leaping, some types of flight etc etc.

 

OK, cool, but what that does, in effect, is change every adjustment attack into NND, and, my bigger concern, means that the same points spent on the same power have different utility, depending on what sfx you pick: drain movement could be defined, for instance as 'air hardening' and then it would effect virtually everything except teleport - more utility than the 'frictionless field, but no difference in cost.

 

The other problem is that is not really scaleable except fromt he attack end - you can't build a power that makes the adjustment power LESS effective - just have a SFX that makes it ineffective.

 

The other alternative would be to substitute a different defence, say flash defence for drain INT, which works by distracting the mind with a pretty lightshow. That is converting all attacks into AVLD for free, but at least it has scaleability.

 

Then you have other problems: four characters have STR 60: the first is a mutant, the second is a demon, the third is a robot and the fourth is a touch telekinetic. When exposed to a strength drain, you apply the SFX: well we have a number of candidates: muscle relaxant gas, for example. Who would that effect? Probably not the robot or the touch telekinetic: what about the demon? Is the mutant's strength actually derived from having mutated musculature or are subtler forces at work - in fact anything he touches has mass and density momentarily drained, giving the effect of massive strength.

 

I don't know many characters who have their characteristics described in enough detail to make that work.

 

So, I come back to my suggestion that it might be nice to talk about SFX/rules interaction in more detail. At present SFX are just a colour wash: there is no reason they cannot be embedded in the system without limiting people's creative freedom. And, as a bonus, it might all make more sense

 

Although SFX discussion is still warranted, I don't think PowD is so terribly flawed from a mechanical perspective. The issue is that Adj. Powers (Transform excepted) target powers, not individuals. As such, there's 2 issues there: one is the system providing yet another attack/defense option to vary things (and so eliminating it reduces options, not necessarily a bad thing, though); and second is that there is just as much question as to why a character's defense is synonymous with defense of a power, along with the "double protection" that such defenses would yield against a presumed concern that Adj. Powers get reduced in abillity.

 

It's simple enough to just reduce the option and make things simpler, as you've suggested, and I think it would basically work fine (some costing to figure out, some dynamics around SFX still in terms of defining reasonable SFX against reasonable defenses and so on, but all resolvable).

 

Alternately, PowD does make sense as an essentially mechanical statement of "this power is hard to reduce." The question is in some part as to why PowD applies to all powers - well, I think that's 2-fold, it's a hold-over of supers thought where supers tend to have more unified (at least ostensibly) powers and you can claim one thing applies to all, but also it's simple balance of course. You could just as easily apply PowD similar to the way Adj. Powers are built, with "one power = 4 defense per 1 CP, all powers of an SFX = 2 defense per 1 CP, all powers = 1 defense per 1 CP" or the like. We do run into SFX problems as always, but I'm not sure that's any big deal in terms of it being "my magic is tougher than your electronic drain" if the Drain is taken with no particular Advantage (NND or such). At least it becomes clearer in this scenario as to the real purpose and place of PowD and Adj. Powers. Maybe. I have to run, wish I had more time to think about this post, but primarily while I have issues with PowD I think mechanically there's still a role there for "attack on power" and "defend power" which is separate from and tactically enriched from "attack you" and "defend myself."