Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

No. I'm tired of repeating myself. If you're interested, you're welcome to read my posts and respond.

 

 

Strange complaint to make. Several people have read your posts and have responded and you have not. You just keep ignoring the facts and put forth your interpretation of the rules that is invalid. Making the argument that any interpretation is legal is just another way of house-ruling and is not relevant to this discussion unless we are, in fact, talking about house-rules which has not been the case with anyone except you.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Okay. I have no interest in being helpful to someone who cannot respond to a simple and easily answered request. Have a nice day.

I haven't asked for your "help". Your request is even more simply and easily answered by reading for yourself the posts I already made. If you join in the conversation late, it's up to you to catch up, and a simple thing to do since the posts are all there sequentially. You have a nice day, too.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Strange complaint to make. Several people have read your posts and have responded and you have not. You just keep ignoring the facts and put forth your interpretation of the rules that is invalid. Making the argument that any interpretation is legal is just another way of house-ruling and is not relevant to this discussion unless we are' date=' in fact, talking about house-rules which has not been the case with anyone except you.[/quote']

What thread are you reading? I've responded to every post question posed to me, some more than once. I haven't ignored any facts (at least none that are relevent), you haven't convinced me that my interpretation of the rules is invalid. And I have *never* made an argument that "any interpretation is legal".

 

Read what I actually say carefully and respond to that (or don't). Don't put words in my mouth or assume I'm saying something other that what I actually said. I am happy to clarify where I've been unclear, or correct misstatements I've made.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

True. But none of them do quite the same thing as mine does. One of the most important principles of the game is the idea that you should be able to model *anything*.

 

I believe that it pretty much is possible to model anything (except perhaps a spoon). In many modelings, Limitations play a key part as well as the base power and Advantages. It seems you are leaving Limitations out of the equation.

 

None of the mechanics you suggested models the flying carpet. Here are the differences, in a nutshell:

 

Advantage   Invited Passengers   Uninvited Passengers
UBO            If willing        None
UAA            Willing or not       None
AoE            If willing        Possible

 

If an uninvited guest steps onto my flying carpet, I have to make him leave or take him with me.

 

What about if it's not built as a flying carpet, and keep it at just the "Flight + AoE", since you correctly pointed out that the Limitation shouldn't give an Advantage.

 

Now, what if someone is stunned, unconscious, or dead? Do they count as willing or unwilling? Another thing I'm not understanding is what part of the build "Flight + AoE" gives someone in the AoE a choice?

 

I remembered another movement power that makes use of AoE. It's Teleportation, built as a Gate. But it requires some form of UOO. Why would it need that to work where the Flight doesn't?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

We're in perfect agreement on this.

 

 

True. But none of them do quite the same thing as mine does. One of the most important principles of the game is the idea that you should be able to model *anything*. None of the mechanics you suggested models the flying carpet. Here are the differences, in a nutshell:

 

Advantage   Invited Passengers   Uninvited Passengers
UBO            If willing        None
UAA            Willing or not       None
AoE            If willing        Possible

If an uninvited guest steps onto my flying carpet, I have to make him leave or take him with me.

Oh, I didn't know that's what we were modeling. I thought this was a kind of suck-people-up to take them places ability where the user had the option of allowing or disallowing, not the "passenger". What you are describing is a Vehicle. There really is no other way to handle it. There are many ways to build the Vehicle, and there is actually an example of a flying carpet in either The Ultimate Vehicle or the Vehicle Sourcebook.

 

Another option is to use any of the legal builds suggested, and then use common sense and say people can jump on uninvited. If you want simple, use simple. There's no need to reinvent the wing, so to speak.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

What thread are you reading? I've responded to every post question posed to me, some more than once. I haven't ignored any facts (at least none that are relevent), you haven't convinced me that my interpretation of the rules is invalid. And I have *never* made an argument that "any interpretation is legal".

 

Read what I actually say carefully and respond to that (or don't). Don't put words in my mouth or assume I'm saying something other that what I actually said. I am happy to clarify where I've been unclear, or correct misstatements I've made.

You have said your interpretation is legal due to a passage in the book that says you can change things. What you're missing is that this particular passage is not a rule. Sure, it's in the book, but just because it's in the book doesn't make it a rule. It's a suggestion on how to use the rules, or modify the rules. At best, it's saying you are not a bad person if you want to do something different than what the rules say or allow. That doesn't change what the rules say or will allow though.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Right now, I have an air/weather controller with this:

 

25 Elemental Control, 50-point powers

17 1) Flight 10", x4 Noncombat, Usable Simultaneously (up to 8 people at once; +1) (50 Active Points); Localized (Passengers must stay within 4' of user; -1/2) 5

26 2) Flight 18", Improved Noncombat Movement (x16) (51 Active Points)

20 3) Strong wind manipulation: Telekinesis (33 STR) (50 Active Points); Affects Whole Object (-1/4)

 

Is there a better (read: cheaper) way to model having flight that can pick up and take up to eight people, willing or not? I'd prefer to have one power that did this instead of two, if at all possible.

 

This was the original post in the thread. It's a pretty straight forward question with a very easy answer that has deteriorated into a slugfest of unwarranted proportion. I think some folks are having their Enraged When Reading Boards and Stubborn Disadvantages triggered here.

 

And the next time anyone goes to another board and defends the system against complaints of being overcomplicated, they'd do well to remember this thread, and that it's only as complicated as we need to make it.

 

This isn't directed at anyone, it's just a general observation. If you do take offense, that's probably b/c you're guilty.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

This was the original post in the thread. It's a pretty straight forward question with a very easy answer that has deteriorated into a slugfest of unwarranted proportion. I think some folks are having their Enraged When Reading Boards and Stubborn Disadvantages triggered here.

 

And the next time anyone goes to another board and defends the system against complaints of being overcomplicated, they'd do well to remember this thread, and that it's only as complicated as we need to make it.

 

This isn't directed at anyone, it's just a general observation. If you do take offense, that's probably b/c you're guilty.

 

Well,

 

I don't think I'm guilty of anything but trying to keep incorrect rules interpretations by some from confusing newcomers. There have been many other far more heated debates over other power builds. Are you suggesting that board members refrain from this activity? It seems like one the PRIMARY reasons this board was created.

 

In direct response to the original post (which I don't believe I answered directly). I think (as others have already pointed out) Telekinesis AOE is a better fit for the proposed Air/Weather-Control Powers Elemental Control.

 

Flight with Usable By Others costs END to each person using the power. UBO at its base grants the power but not control of it. The Air/Wind SFX suggests that the power's owner has ultimate control of it. Also , since it IS an EC , ALL powers are usable simultaneously and objects or characters grabbed/carried by TK can be dragged along at whatever movement rate the TK owner can move (using a seperate Flight EC slot).

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Well,

 

I don't think I'm guilty of anything but trying to keep incorrect rules interpretations by some from confusing newcomers. There have been many other far more heated debates over other power builds. Are you suggesting that board members refrain from this activity? It seems like one the PRIMARY reasons this board was created.

 

I'm not suggesting anything, merely observing.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

(I accidentally overlooked this post earlier.)

 

You just described a vehicle. Use those rules.

Well, I described *one* aspect that a vehicle has. But a vehicle is not appropriate for all such builds. Yes, you could build a flying carpet that way, although it violates the usual rule for vehicles in that the "interior" and "exterior" sizes would be the same.

 

A vehicle has all sorts of other aspects that a player might not want: A vehicle has its own DEF, BODY, DEX, and SPD. A vehicle is subject to loss, theft, hijacking, damage, destruction, etc., which may not be appropriate. Also the vehicle costs 1/5 of its total points. If I'm willing to pay five times as much, shouldn't I be allowed to get what I want?

 

Just because the SFX of "flying carpet" sounds like a (small-v) vehicle, doesn't mean that it *must* be purchased as a (capital-V) Vehicle.

 

And of course there are other SFX that don't suggest a vehicle at all, such as the "ride in my wake" flight, sort of like surfing.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

I believe that it pretty much is possible to model anything (except perhaps a spoon). In many modelings' date=' [b']Limitations[/b] play a key part as well as the base power and Advantages. It seems you are leaving Limitations out of the equation.

So? I'm leaving them out because I don't need them to model what I want.

 

What about if it's not built as a flying carpet, and keep it at just the "Flight + AoE", since you correctly pointed out that the Limitation shouldn't give an Advantage.

Then it isn't a flying carpet. I'm not sure what you're asking here. "Flying carpet" isn't a Limitation, it's a SFX. The SFX could be "an air current forms around me that carries me where I want to go, and if someone else gets into the air current, they'll come along."

 

Now, what if someone is stunned, unconscious, or dead? Do they count as willing or unwilling? Another thing I'm not understanding is what part of the build "Flight + AoE" gives someone in the AoE a choice?

Then they're stunned, unconscious, or dead. You already don't need any advantage, or even any power to move someone who's unconscious or dead. The choice comes from the fact that you don't lose your movement powers, and in a sense, you even gain a limited form of flight. If you don't want to be affected, you leave the area. If you do want to be affected, you enter the area.

 

I remembered another movement power that makes use of AoE. It's Teleportation, built as a Gate. But it requires some form of UOO. Why would it need that to work where the Flight doesn't?

Because it doesn't do the same thing. I seem to be making this same argument over and over again. I say, "I want X." You say, "That's similar to Y, therefore you have to buy Y instead." But I don't want Y, I want X. It doesn't matter how similar they are. A hamburger is similar to a cheeseburger, but there is a difference, and I expect to get the one I ordered.

 

In the case of "some form of UOO," well, there are only two forms: UAA *forces* only those people I want to come along - not what I want. And UBO selects *only* those people I want to come along - also not what I want.

 

I get the feeling (though I may be wrong) that this attitude is a leftover remnant from that other RPG system that we all started with: the idea that if you want Gandalf or Merlin etc., the closest you can come to that is a wizard with *these particular prescribed rules and no others*. If that isn't quite what you want, too bad.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

What you are describing is a Vehicle. There really is no other way to handle it.

Sure there is. It's the one I've been talking about this whole time. And it's much simpler than the Vehicle rules.

 

There are many ways to build the Vehicle, and there is actually an example of a flying carpet in either The Ultimate Vehicle or the Vehicle Sourcebook.

And what if that isn't what I want? What if I don't want all the baggage that comes with a capital-V Vehicle? What if I'm willing to pay full price for this ability, rather than the 1/5 cost? What system am I playing, again? Is this HERO or B&D?

 

Another option is to use any of the legal builds suggested, and then use common sense and say people can jump on uninvited. If you want simple, use simple. There's no need to reinvent the wing, so to speak.

Or I could use common sense to build it the way common sense actually suggests, without having to invent or re-invent anything: I take the existing power, Flight, and add the existing advantage, AoE. Much simpler than building it some other way and then tacking on modifications to say, "It's UOO, but not really."

 

On another thread, you and I agreed that we can use common sense to ignore the rule that "No BODY" must also mean "No Knockback" for no additional limitation. Why not use common sense here as well?

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

I'm pretty sure the book says it's OK for GMs to change the rules. It seems to me that a good time to make such changes is when an affect isn't achievable without six pages of debate, and when it's a common effect in the genre and not one with a great deal of impact on the campaign. I'd say taxiing people around with a movement power falls into that category.

 

Usable On Others does not have an option for giving the power to a willing target and having them not be in control of the power. Usable As Attack does that, and willing targets could be considered DCV 0, but you could still miss the attack roll. "Ok, GL, roll to pick up your teammates with your power ring...ah, too bad, you rolled an 18, try again." The roll on willing targets could be handwaved, but then again, we're talking about handwaving. Why not just make a Limited Power limit on the UOO advantage to handle the lack of control for the passengers?

 

Let's look at some common cases:

 

Storm picks up her teammates and hauls them along with her on the wind. TK probably handles that one just fine.

 

Green Lantern picks up his teammates in a force field bubble and flies with them, providing transport, defense, and sometimes life support. I'd say Force Wall is appropriate, house rule that you can drag people along if you have any TK STR, so you can also transport prisoners trapped in the bubble, and buy LS linked to the FW. So, you broke a rule to get a genre effect, no big deal.

 

Ice slides, and other matter surfing powers. Frankly, most applications of slides I see have the character carrying the person or the passenger passively sitting on the ice slide. Other people may jump on the slide, or disrupt it by damaging the slide. Physical Manifestation as a limitation works here. The small advantage gained that someone can ride (but with severe penalties to act in any meaningful way is outweighed by the slide being attackable, because after all, the hero could simply sling a willing passenger over the shoulder.

 

Flying Carpet. Flight with a physical manifestation or focus works for me. As far as I'm concerned, go ahead and slap on AE: Hex to it for carrying another person. The vehicles rules also work, and some purists may prefer that rule, in favor of using what's available first. Either way works, neither one breaks the game, so who cares?

 

The issue is rarely going to be game breaking. Just make sure that the player pays appropriately for anything that gives a combat advantage on a regular basis, and go for it.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

For those who might have missed this earlier post which had been edited.

 

 

Examples of Variable Target "Flight":

 

1) Telekinesis (25 STR), Area Of Effect (4" Radius; +1) (75 Active Points) [Notes: Unlimited # of unwilling targets.] - END=7

 

1a) Flight 5", Position Shift* (* or any other method to get base power = to 15 active points), Ranged (+1/2), Usable As Attack (x8 maximum weight per inanimate target; +1 3/4), Area Of Effect (20" Radius; +1 1/2), Selective (+1/4) (75 Active Points) [Notes: Maximum of 8 unwilling targets. AOE + Range only means that center of AOE can be something other than the power's owner] - END=7

 

2) Flight 10", Area Of Effect (6" Radius; +1), Usable As Attack (x8 maximum weight per inanimate target; +1 3/4) (75 Active Points) [Notes: Maximum of 8 unwilling targets.] - END=7

 

3) Flight 15", Ranged (+1/2), Usable Simultaneously (up to 8 people at once; +1) (75 Active Points) [Notes: Power can be SHARED among a maximum of 8 willing targets (including owner). ] - END=7

 

4) Flight 15", Usable Simultaneously (up to 2 people at once; +1/2), Area Of Effect (5" Radius; +1) (75 Active Points) [Notes: Power can be shared with 1 target (or granted to 2) within 5" radius simultaneously.] - END=7

 

5) Flight 25", Usable Simultaneously (up to 2 people at once; +1/2) (75 Active Points) [Notes: Power can be shared with 1 target (or granted to 2) via touch* simultaneously. * Only required to initially grant power, once granted only line of sight is required to maintain.] - END=7

 

6) Flight 30", Usable By Other (+1/4) (75 Active Points) [Notes: Power can be granted (but not used at same time) to 1 target via touch*. * Only required to initially grant power, once granted only line of sight is required to maintain.] - END=7

 

 

further notes:

END is paid by EVERY user in the case of "Usable By Other" and Usuable Simultaneously" but is only paid by the owner in the case of TK and "Usable As Attack".

[Dust Raven]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Sure there is. It's the one I've been talking about this whole time. And it's much simpler than the Vehicle rules.

Simpler, and also illegal per the standard rule. Please acknowledge this or my part in this discussion is finished.

 

 

And what if that isn't what I want? What if I don't want all the baggage that comes with a capital-V Vehicle? What if I'm willing to pay full price for this ability, rather than the 1/5 cost? What system am I playing, again? Is this HERO or B&D?

Don't insult me. Should I ask you if you are playing Hero or playing "let's pretend"? You are making up rules, ignoring rules, or just using house rules.

 

Or I could use common sense to build it the way common sense actually suggests, without having to invent or re-invent anything: I take the existing power, Flight, and add the existing advantage, AoE. Much simpler than building it some other way and then tacking on modifications to say, "It's UOO, but not really."

I take the existing Power: Succor INT, and add the existing Advantage, Persistant. What's wrong with this build? It's illegal. Not all Advantages and Powers are legal matches.

 

On another thread, you and I agreed that we can use common sense to ignore the rule that "No BODY" must also mean "No Knockback" for no additional limitation. Why not use common sense here as well?

Yes we can agree we can ignore a rule if it doesn't make sense. However, I fully admit each time that it's a house rule, or that I'm otherwise going against the standard rules. And we definately disagree on what is common sense here. The existing rules accomplish what you describe; there is no need to toss them out just because you don't like the syntax.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Don't insult me.

I'm not insulting you. I'm asking you a question: "What if your power constuction (in this case a Vehicle) isn't what I want?"

 

The existing rules accomplish what you describe; there is no need to toss them out just because you don't like the syntax.

I have no problem with the syntax. My problem is with the *results*. The existing rules (as you interpret them) do *not* accomplish what I describe. Your Vehicle suggestion doesn't, nor do any of the builds in Hyper-Man's last post. They are all fine builds, they're all legal, but they don't give me the power I'm looking for. Close, but not quite.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Exactly! Which is why UBO is not the correct advantage for a "Fly along with me" power.

 

Could post an example of this using the "PhilFleicshmann" rules again?

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Could post an example of this using the "PhilFleicshmann" rules again?

I'm not sure what you're asking for here, but I'll take a shot:

 

Willco-Man rides around on a flying welcome mat, bought as Flight, UBO One other (that's about all there's room for), Simultaneously, with some custom Limitation that says the other person can't actually control the flight, but has to stay on the mat, and only Willco-Man can control where it flies.

 

His arch-nemesis, The Party Crasher, turns invisible and steps onto our hero's mat. Despite all logic, PC must stay behind because WM hasn't granted him the power, which is required for UBO.

 

Later, Willco-Man's teammate, the Frail Fainter has been K.O.ed by an enemy. WM wants to get him to safety, so he lays him down on the mat and takes off. Despite all logic, FF is left behind because UBO requires FF to control his flight, pay the END, etc.

 

The next day, Willco-Man teams up with a few old girlfriends, the Double-Mini Twins, with the awesome power to Shrink down to the size of action figures. They climb aboard the flying mat, because there's plenty of room for the diminutive duo. Despite all logic, they can't both come along, because the UBO as purchased can only grant flight to one of them.

 

All of which lead to the conclusion that UBO is not the correct Advantage to apply to Flight for this particular concept.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

I was actually asking for a specific build. One that fits your sfx example would be nice.

 

Edit. I'm not asking what you think is wrong with everyone else's method but rather what you think should take its place.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

I was actually asking for a specific build. One that fits your sfx example would be nice.

 

Edit. I'm not asking what you think is wrong with everyone else's method but rather what you think should take its place.

How many times do I have to say it? Apparently at least one more:

 

Flight, Area of Effect (One Hex, Radius, "Trailing" Line, or "Trailing" Cone would be the most likely shapes, but it could be any of them)

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

How many times do I have to say it? Apparently at least one more:

 

Flight, Area of Effect (One Hex, Radius, "Trailing" Line, or "Trailing" Cone would be the most likely shapes, but it could be any of them)

 

What you described in your previous example can be built using several legal methods.

 

One would be a vehicle. And I agree that the vehicle rules can be clunky at best.

 

Another valid and easy to use build would be to use a Compound Power: Flight + Force Wall.

1. Force Wall with "Only to form horizontal surface" and "No Range" Limitations. No Range automatically center's the Force Wall on the power's owner meaning it goes wherever he goes. The rules for "size" and how much it can "lift" (via PD) are deterimined by the basic Force Wall construction mechanics.

2. Flight which can take the Linked Limitation to the Force Wall.

 

Now the mechanics for determining how "fast" and how "many passengers" can come along are completely seperated as they should be (just like a vehicle) but in a very simple build. No need to violate existing rule mechanics exists.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

I'm not insulting you. I'm asking you a question: "What if your power constuction (in this case a Vehicle) isn't what I want?"

 

 

I have no problem with the syntax. My problem is with the *results*. The existing rules (as you interpret them) do *not* accomplish what I describe. Your Vehicle suggestion doesn't, nor do any of the builds in Hyper-Man's last post. They are all fine builds, they're all legal, but they don't give me the power I'm looking for. Close, but not quite.

 

Then just to clarify things, what exactly do you want?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Another valid and easy to use build would be to use a Compound Power: Flight + Force Wall.

1. Force Wall with "Only to form horizontal surface" and "No Range" Limitations. No Range automatically center's the Force Wall on the power's owner meaning it goes wherever he goes. The rules for "size" and how much it can "lift" (via PD) are deterimined by the basic Force Wall construction mechanics.

2. Flight which can take the Linked Limitation to the Force Wall.

 

The problem with this, and I think Phil will agree with me, is that Force Wall does not and cannot support any weight. It has no STR. It's actually in the rules you can't use FW to build a bridge for example, so you wouldn't be able to build a flying carpet either. I think this is bovis excrement, but thems the rules and the topic of a different thread.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

The problem with this' date=' and I think Phil will agree with me, is that Force Wall does not and cannot support any weight. It has no STR. It's actually in the rules you can't use FW to build a bridge for example, so you wouldn't be able to build a flying carpet either. I think this is bovis excrement, but thems the rules and the topic of a different thread.[/quote']

 

Actually Force Walls CAN support weight, see 5er pg 180 last paragraph. How much is determined by use of the Crushing Damage rules on pg 422. There is a 'warning against its use this way as a cheap substitute for Flight UBO and TK' but not a flat prohibition.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Flight with Passengers - What's the Best Way?

 

Actually Force Walls CAN support weight' date=' see 5er pg 180 last paragraph. How much is determined by use of the Crushing Damage rules on pg 422. There is a 'warning against its use this way as a cheap substitute for Flight UBO and TK' but not a flat prohibition.[/quote']

Really? Maybe I'm remembering something from pre 5er or maybe 4th then.