Is this a valid build?

[Tornado]

Personal Regenerating Force Field:

Force Wall: 1 PD/1 ED, 0 END (+1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Autofire: 3 Shots (+1 1/2) (17 AP), No Range (-1/2), Self Only (-1/2), Maximum Force Walls Active: 12 (-0)

8 Real Points

 

The effect is:

You have a second BODY bar, outside all of your normal defenses which has 12 BODY and regenerates at the rate of 3 BODY each one of your actions. While this bar is in effect, you can't be knocked out or harmed.

 

You would obviously have to buy Indirect (+1/4), in the same way a character with Desolidification would have to buy that +2 advantage on all of his good powers.

 

But otherwise, is it valid?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

Aside from the Autofire - completely legal.

 

Autofire has a note under Force Wall that it should not be allowed to be used to build successive Force Walls around the same target (not creating concentric rings of defense) without GM Permission.

 

Given this is a 1 Def FW though, I might be inclined to allow it as a decent attack could take many, if not all, of them down. Certainly more than 3 a Phase.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

Reminds me of some folks attempts to model Master Chief's force field in Halo.

 

Anyhow, is the force wall supposed to cover your whole body? Because I don't think you have enough length to do so, resulting in you having to choose your exact coverage configurations, such as six walls in front and six in back or twelve in front and so forth. You will probably want to up that to 2".

 

Also, what kind of DC's are your opponents tossing around, cause this thing probably wouldn't survive one hit (and definitly not 2) in the previous or curret game I play in...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

I'd say it is not a legal build, but I am a skinflint tightwad.

 

This reminds me of way back when, before the current boards even, a little posted 'no prize competition' for the cheapest build to survive a ground zero nuclear blast.

 

Autofire force walls let you have some ridiculous amount of defence for less than 20 points and was the winner as I recall.

 

Perhaps that is why they changed the rules.

 

I said it is not a legal build and it isn't if the idea is to stack the force walls, as ghost-angel said. The Hero rule makes absolutely no logical sense to me: you can create more than one wall but you can't put them in certain configurations, like one behind the other to double defences. Unlike ghost-angel I would not allow it to slide.

 

I just rule, for the sake of my rapidly diminishing sanity, that you can create more than one FW by the application of the power more than once BUT it is all the same force wall, so if any of it is penetrated, then all of it is penetrated, and it comes tumbling down, so even stacking it 100 deep would not help you: when the first one falls they all do.

 

What you need it this:

 

12pd/12ed force wall 60 points, englobing (2 hex sides - can't remember - 5 points?) 0 END Persistent 130 points

 

Damaged when stops BODY -1/2 to -1, depending on how you want to play it

Takes extra time to fully activate (can only add 3 pd and ed per phase) -1/2 no range self only -1 Real cost 43 points

 

Now what I'd be inclined to do is put it in a MP like so:

 

43 MP Pool (all slot have limitations damaged when stops BODY and extra time to activate no range and self only -2 total)

9m 24 pd FW with extra hex side 0 END persistent

9m 24 ed FW with extra hex side 0 END persistent

 

Each time the FW is damaged, it regenerates to protect against the type of damage that damaged it (+0 - you can't control it but it is a pretty useful, if exploitable effect), so if it starts as 12/12, it is hit by a blast of energy and loses 6 BODY (say) it regenerates energy defences, so would then (when fully recovered) be a 6 pd/18ed FW. Actually you ought to make each slot transparent too, but I'd rule it is all effectively one FW, so you would not need to.

 

Mind you that is unnecessarily complicated and so on. Also, technically, if knocked right down it needs to be re-activated so that would have to either be done manually or by a trigger advantage. You GM might waive that one.

 

You may have noticed this costs a lot more.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

In fairness, Sean, your construct is more effective as well as more costly. My 10d6 EB will bounce off your construct all day (absent a very lucky roll) but will tear through the proposed construct after a couple of hits.

 

Consider a dozen agents with 8d6 Blasters. Little hope against your 12/12 Wall, but the first two will take down all 12 Force Wallls and leave the rest targetting the chewy center.

 

I'm not sure I'd allow it either, but it does have some weaknesses.

[Vondy]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

Its valid, but its also formally classified as GM's discretion. As a general rule I don't allow autofire force walls because they tend to be abusive, but this one is so weak that it can easily be overcome. In fact, despite its cheapness, it might not be very effective compared to other constructs. I'd probably allow it.

 

However, I have a question: does Persistant actually cause the Force Wall to "re-start" when its hit, or does it simply mean the Force Wall doesn't drop when you are con-stunned or unconscious? My gut tells me that its the latter and that what you actually want is a Trigger with an automatic reset.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

I did include 'wall damaged when it stops BODY damage' as a limtiation, so it wouldn't last long at all against a group of agents with 8d6 blasters: two hits and it would be down, just like the other construct, and in a lot of campaigns where this level of defence is appropriate, one hit from a villain will see it in tatters, hence the adaptive variant.

[SpydirShellX]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

My method for dealing with layered force walls is similar for the rules for attacking through objects.

For each hex of the objects, it takes an additional point of BOD to get through it. When I deal with layered force walls (autofire or otherwise), I treat each "individual" force wall as if it were one hex. Thus there is some benfit to a single attack in layering defenses, but the main use can be that you might still have some of it up after a hit that breaks the outer part.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

Personal Regenerating Force Field:

Force Wall: 1 PD/1 ED, 0 END (+1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Autofire: 3 Shots (+1 1/2) (17 AP), No Range (-1/2), Self Only (-1/2), Maximum Force Walls Active: 12 (-0)

8 Real Points

 

No, not valid.

 

A possibly valid build would look more like:

 

FW: 3/3 (2 hexes wide, circular), 0 END, Persistent, Trigger (0 Phase action, automatically resets, triggered by less than 4 FWs surrounding character), Self Only, No Range.

 

I didn't post a cost because I'm not sure what the value of the Trigger is, though I expect it to be similar to that of the Autofire. If so, then this costs a total of 24-30 points.

 

I will point out that I probably wouldn't ever allow a build like this. It reeks of munchkinism. A 12 DEF Force Wall and automatically rebuilds itself and is persistant... all for less than 30 points! Makes me want to drag out my AoE Autofire10 2d6 NND and add Indirect to it.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

No, not valid.

 

A possibly valid build would look more like:

 

FW: 3/3 (2 hexes wide, circular), 0 END, Persistent, Trigger (0 Phase action, automatically resets, triggered by less than 4 FWs surrounding character), Self Only, No Range.

 

I didn't post a cost because I'm not sure what the value of the Trigger is, though I expect it to be similar to that of the Autofire. If so, then this costs a total of 24-30 points.

 

I will point out that I probably wouldn't ever allow a build like this. It reeks of munchkinism. A 12 DEF Force Wall and automatically rebuilds itself and is persistant... all for less than 30 points! Makes me want to drag out my AoE Autofire10 2d6 NND and add Indirect to it.

 

Actually, it's 4 3DEF Force Walls, you still can't surround yourself with mor than one without GM permission. A smallish Autofire Attack - say 1 1/2 D6 KA - would tear through that thing like paper.

[Vondy]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

Actually' date=' it's 4 3DEF Force Walls, you still can't surround yourself with mor than one without GM permission. A smallish Autofire Attack - say 1 1/2 D6 KA - would tear through that thing like paper.[/quote']

 

Translation: 1 SWAT Team member with an MP-5 and AP rounds.

 

And they seldom work alone...

[pinecone]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

what you guys said...plus I think the REnd should be increased in cost because of the Auto fire...(+1 rather than =1/2..)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

Do you know what I'd like to see?

 

The ability to dump stun and body analogues into defences.

 

So, you have this force wall, it has a BODY value as well as a DEF value, so it can be damaged without being taken down.

 

You have a force field with a STUN value, which acts as a buffer against damage until that additional protection goes away through taking damage.

 

The advantage of having those values in the defences rather than as boosted base stats is that the combat effects of taking damage (eg stunning for stun and bleeding/disablement for body) would not cut in. To balance that advantage you would need to buy a recovery rate, which would make the cost somewhat higher in effect than the base stats.

 

Anyway, it is an idea.

 

THOSE COSTS IN FULL:

 

BODY and STUN for defences cost 2 points and 1 point per point respectively. You don't have to buy them if you do not want to, but if you do, no damage of that type gets through to the character until the amount in the defence has been ablated by damage.

 

Defence STUN and BODY recover PS12 (and only PS12) and recovery costs 1 points per point for STUN and 3 point per point for BODY.

 

Thoughts?

[CraterMaker]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

Two things - First, about the original build, you say it would prevent you from being stunned or knocked out untill they fell-

 

"While this bar is in effect, you can't be knocked out or harmed."

 

Erm, I don't know how you can manage that, or what sort of advantage it might be .. Maby I'm not understanding how Force Wall works, too..

 

Secondly, can you buy Self ONly and No Range together? I could understand if it were a power intended to be used on other people (like Aid, Healing, etc), but making a No Range ForceWall- which would normally only protect one or two people- Making it Self Only might be worth -1/4 at most, I'd think.

 

Either way, it's intriguing in concept..

 

-CraterMaker

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

Secondly' date=' can you buy Self ONly and No Range together? I could understand if it were a power intended to be used on other people (like Aid, Healing, etc), but making a No Range ForceWall- which would normally only protect one or two people- Making it Self Only might be worth -1/4 at most, I'd think. [/quote']

 

I believe you officially can buy self only and no range together. Your Force Wall could be No Range (-1/2) without being Self Only. It could now protect normals, be used to interpose between an attack and a target, and could, with extra hexes, cover a long line beginning at your hex.

 

Without self only, and with no range, the bullet pings off your force wall, and you and your DNPC are safe. With Self Only, the bullet travels through your DNPC and then pings off your force wall.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is this a valid build?

 

There was a recent thread on self only v no range, and the official answer is that you CAN take both. It is in the book.

 

Now FW works differently to almost all other defences in that it allows nothing through until it falls, so a blast that did 11 BODY and 48 STUN to a FW with 12 DEF would put nothing through. If it did 13 BODY and 48 STUN it would cause 1 BODY and 36 STUN to pass through.

 

You cannot stack force walls to give yourself or any single target more defence than you can generate with a single force wall. That's my problem with this build: officially you just cannot do it, and that is quite explicit, not just one of my dodgy interpretations.

 

The only way to build a 12 DEF force wall is with a force wall with 12 DEF.

 

OK, logically this makes no sense. Fine, it is a game balance mechanic. I have fixes, if anyone is interested.