Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Your initial premise was that' date=' regardless of magnitude, the flexible defenses were unbalanced. We've now established that we only disagree as to the magnitude of flexible defenses that are unbalanced. [/quote']

 

A 1 pt multipower with 2 slots costs 3 pts. Certainly not unbalancing for 1 flexible defensive pt.

 

Just like it sounds like you have a problem with multipowers specifically. Other 60 AP attacks that are pretty safe wins against the right opponent:

 

(a) 6d6 STR drain against no Power defense brick. You note in a prior post that allowing a 16DC attack in a 12DC game is hugely overpowered. A 6d6 SR drain sucks 4 DC per hit out of the Brick, making him underpowered. If 12d6 would have been a fair fight, good luck winning with 8d6 or less.

 

( 4d6 STR drain at range - a bit less useful against Brocks (only sucks out about 3 DC per hit), but great against those 10 STR mentalists and other characters who failed to buy STR up because they use other attacks from range. Again, characters with no Power defense are pretty much guaranteed to lose.

 

© Substitute END for STR in the above examples - how long can you keep going losing 28 or 42 END per phase? END using characters lacking power defense are done.

 

(d) 12d6 Mental Illusions are pretty effective if you have no mental defense or boosted Ego. Ego +20 makes friends seem like enemies and enemies like friends. You might make the breakout roll, but the next one comes after a turn - making you my ally for a turn seems like a pretty good variant on "instant KO" - thanks, Grond.

 

(e) A PD attack in my normally Energy MP (an ice bolt instead of a cold attack, for example) when you have 15/15 and a MP of +25/+25 flexible defenses will hit you for 42 on your weak defense when you believed all I had was energy. 42 - 15 = 27, which stuns you with your 23 CON. Once you're stunned, it should be all but over in those one on one fights you thought you had the advantage in.

 

a) You have to hit first. Which gives the brick a chance to beat you before you lower his Str too much because he can hit first. Or block/dodge etc until he gets an opening. Flex dude with 40 PD doesn’t even give the brick a chance.

 

Same as A

 

c) With End drains, the target can still fight back effectively. He can easily get the 2-3 hits needed to take out Leech boy before the loss of stun knocks him out.

 

d) Breakout roll. A 15 Ego defender needs a 12- to breakout, or 11- if it’s a +25 effect. Not too difficult to do.

 

e) Not too many people with a PD energy blast and a ED energy blast in the same multipower. And it’s not too much of a stretch for the attacker to roll 4 under average, leaving flex boy able to shift to a balanced slot and fight back. Whereas against the single form attacker, flex boy doesn’t even leave that sort of opening. Luck pretty much isn’t going to be a factor.

 

I’m surprised you didn’t use the Int or Pre drain. That’s a lot more devastating than any of the ones you mentioned, and virtually nobody has enough of either to resist a 6d6 drain…

 

I agree that, because defense powers cost less than attack powers, the ability to adjust them at the same rate based on points is excessively effective. I therefore concur with the decision to halve the effect on defensive powers so that they are drained at a similar rate of benefit, rather than the same rate of points.

 

Similarly, I would think nothing of a player with his Brick spending 50 points on STR, but would be pretty taken aback by any player proposing to spend 50points on PD. A Multipower? Well, let's look at its impact - whether it holds defenses, attacks or what have you.

 

Adjusting a defense should be halved, yet adding directly to one shouldn’t. That doesn’t compute.

 

If I thought published precedents were more than remotely relevant, I might wait until I was at home and look it up. Your dodge of the question suggests to me that I am correct, and the bonus points allocated to these characters to offset their inefficient design are substantial.

 

BTW, are all those attack powers instant, or do they have the potential to be used together (as addressed in your recent rules question?). The MP means they can never be used together, you'll recall.

 

I don’t think any of the 4 characters I mentioned is that high in point total. Stormfront has lots of Change Environments, but the other 3 have lots of instant attack powers.

 

Why would it need to be? You've said any smart player would optimize in this fashion. Are GM's not smart players?

 

If optimizing in this fashion was allowable. Funny how none of the published characters have anything remotely resembling adjustable defenses.

 

If "the point" is that it hasn't been published, I'll happily concede. If the point is that what has a published precedent is in any way relevant, then I don't concede that point.

 

And given the number of stop signs, caution signs, "at the GM's option", "GM's should be wary" and similar comments in the book, I think any ability so obvious and so overpowered as you assert flexible defenses are would have gotten a mention somewhere.

 

If flexible defenses were so obviously non-abusive as you seem to be presenting, then surely it would be a regular occurrence.

 

I don’t see a stop sign or GM option for charges of end reserve either.

 

Should it be? Is that a reasonable cost for only having one available at a time? The book standard for "can only use one at a time" is, after all, a Multipower.

 

Your "solution" fails miserably if the concept of being able to fine-tune defenses was valid. Unlike you, I consider that it is posssible such a concept, where a limited pool is available for defenses and the character has to choose whether to bolster his ability to deflect physical force or radiant energy, could be valid and should be posssible to construct mechanically. "Just buy them both up" fails to reflect the concept.

 

It works perfectly if that’s what you want. +10 PD and +10 ED with lockout on one of them. That costs 15 or 17 pts depending on whether you make it a -1/2 or -1 limitation. And it makes adding Mental, Flash, or Power defense slots considerably more expensive than 1 pt for 10.

 

BTW, one could just as easily tell the player with three attacks in his Multipower to "buy them all up". Why can't Light Lad fire his laser KA, his lightburst EB and his blinding Flash all at the same time? Provide me with the justification.

 

Because it’s not as unbalancing as making yourself nigh invulnerable.

 

Yup. Now find me that good reason that the ability can be fine tuned, but only somewhat. I suppose he might have three very discrete SFX, one of which logically defends only against physical, one against energy and one against both.

 

3 different spells in a spellbook

 

Why aren't all attack multipowers based on 55 or 65 points to take advantage of the same rounding rules?

 

They would be if it were a 55 or 65 pt damage cap for a campaign. If it were a 60 pt cap, then losing 1 DC from your attack hurts more than the marginal gain from exploiting the rounding rules if you go with 55 pts. The way champions works, that last d6 of damage is worth far more than the first d6 in general.

 

Research should provide narrative information, not game mechanical effects (unless, by "research", you mean "go home and look up the villain in CKC ). After the second fight, the Gadgeteer can likely whip up something specific to target the character - or are gadgeteers also banned in your games?

 

I probably wouldn’t allow a gadgeteer who can change in the field. One who can in the lab isn’t a problem since he has to guess the proper configuration each time.

 

As I said, we need to look at the entire character. To "eventually beat Grond", he has to stick around long enough for me to whittle away at his Stun (assuming I have an attack that can do enough damage per turn that he doesn't just recover it all...) until he's finally KO'd. And the city's still trashed, so I find it hard to consider that a "win".

 

It's a massive improvement to remain conscious while the villains achieve their goals. Got it.

 

Yes it is a massive improvement. In the first case, you beat Grond after a little delay and he has perhaps 1 turn to rampage. In the second case, you’re lying unconscious and Grond has minutes or longer to rampage. Sounds like a HUGE improvement to me.

 

OK, 1 player is allowed to pay 1.5 pts per DC for attacks but everyone else has to pay 5 pt per DC. I guess you're ok with allowing that.

 

That's a 5 attack Multipower vs 5 attacks purchased with no frameworks. Many characters boost their resistant PD and ED for 1/2 point per defense point in an elemental control, by the way.

 

And 0.8 points for PD is the cost if we apply a -1/4 limitation - you've suggested a -1/2 or -1 limitation when the character must choose between the PD or the ED.

 

 

90 pts for 5 potential 12 DC attacks vs 1 18 DC attack. Sounds fair to me.

 

18 pts for 15 pts of flexible defense and 3 slots vs 9/9 doesn’t sound fair to me.

 

So it’s perfectly ok for you to have a player pay .8 pts for PD while everyone else pays 1 pt. Gotcha.

 

This whole concept of "I need to see the character as a whole and judge him by comparison to the campaign" escapes you, doesn't it?

 

I'd need some basis for the tradeoff to justify the mechanical build. Assuming I did expect it, Turtle Man can expect that he will face PRE attacks while he is in his shell - that's a signiifcant and exploitable weakness as easily discovered with experience and/or research as the correct allocation of my defensive multipower in any given situation.

 

"Turtle Man puts up his shell."

 

"LionMane roars and slashes at the ground, threatenting to peel Turtle Man's shell off him and use it as a salad bowl at fancy dinner parties - 42 point PRE attack"

 

In the meantime, Turtle Man has +3 on all his Pre based skills (since they almost always occur out of combat). And the one thing about Presence attacks is that Pre is highly visible (by definition), so unless it was a fear spell or something of that nature, Turtle Man doesn’t leave himself vulnerable vs most targets. I mean LionMane’s 60 Pre should be a dead giveaway.

 

 

So you would agree that a multipower with 60 AP attacks (or 60 points of Density Increase) and Desolid, 0 END, gives up nothing when the character is desolid, correct? His other powers were only useful for attacking, and being desolid means losing the ability to attack.

 

He gives up the ability to attack. That’s pretty big.

 

My desire to defend it depends on the character concept that supports this being the appropriate mechanical build. My willingness to allow it starts there, and proceeds through my own analysis of "will this be unbalanced in my game?". I don't see a concept that would make me comfortable with the above, but I'm reluctant to classify anything as "impossible".

 

I consider the PD/ED multipower as inappropriate as a Pre/PD multipower.

 

 

Gary, first off I appreciate your sense of fairness in pointing these out. Maybe not directly on point, but you know the odds I would have picked them up since I'm not looking at the published characters.

 

I would note, however, that the ability to trade off between armor and DCV seems extremely powerful to me, likely on a par with trading between PD and ED. Consider:

 

- opponent is competetive and lacks any AoE attacks. Let's say he needs a 12- to hit. Set Shield to +6 DCV (to pick a number) and go to a 6- to hit. That's pretty close to "nigh invulnerable".

 

- If the opponent has attacks that can hit me with the shield used for DCV, set it to +10/+10 Armor. I've lost nothing.

 

Ignoring any other slots, I've paid an extra 6 points (from 30 for Armor to 36 for the MP) to have the option of sacrificing 10/10 defenses to enhance my DCV by 6. That's a lot better than a Martial Dodge, in my books!

 

Yeah, DCV in a multipower can be devastating. I don’t agree with it, but at least there are all sorts of warnings about allowing special powers in frameworks. It gets even more obscene when it’s in a EC like with Vibron who has +8 DCV in a 40 pt EC that costs end. But that’s another discussion.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

I tend to agree that the ability to be "everything proof" poses significant balance issues and I would be very' date='very loathe to allow a multipower in which it existed unless the concept was rock solid. I usually am willing to give any PC or build a shot and if I did allow the construct, it would be with the proviso that the player have a back up plan in case the build proved too unbalanced and must be redone. Communication and good will on the part of the GMs and players usually solves any difficulty of this sort.[/quote']

 

Sounds like a good philosophy to me!

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

a) You have to hit first. Which gives the brick a chance to beat you before you lower his Str too much because he can hit first. Or block/dodge etc until he gets an opening. Flex dude with 40 PD doesn’t even give the brick a chance.

 

Same as A

 

Flex Dude has to set his MP. Perhaps this is part of the disconnect - in my little world, Multipowers don't have a set default that is up at all times unless the character is using a secific ability. The fact that the MP is configurable implies (to me - not universally) that it must be configured to be in operation.

 

Mind you, if Flex Dude always has his physical defense slot up, then anyone doing a bit of research will discover he's generally invulnerable to physical harm, so why would the Brick attack him to begin with?

 

[OFF TOPIC: I'm reminded of the Fallen Angel comic, where someone figures out she has to be focusing on invulnerability to be invulnerable, and catches her by surprise.]

 

Again, that's not the way everyone interprets a Multipower, but that interpretation could assist in managing flexible defenses.

 

d) Breakout roll. A 15 Ego defender needs a 12- to breakout' date=' or 11- if it’s a +25 effect. Not too difficult to do.[/quote']

 

15 Ego hit with 42 is Ego +5, so 11-. He has a 37.5% chance of being one punched by the ability. That's significant, in my books. And if he blows that roll, he's attacking his teammates for the next turn, until he gets the next one.

 

e) Not too many people with a PD energy blast and a ED energy blast in the same multipower. And it’s not too much of a stretch for the attacker to roll 4 under average' date=' leaving flex boy able to shift to a balanced slot and fight back. Whereas against the single form attacker, flex boy doesn’t even leave that sort of opening. Luck pretty much isn’t going to be a factor.[/quote']

 

Flex Boy needs to set his defenses right the first time. That's also luck.

 

I’m surprised you didn’t use the Int or Pre drain. That’s a lot more devastating than any of the ones you mentioned' date=' and virtually nobody has enough of either to resist a 6d6 drain…[/quote']

 

I tried to stay away from the stock answers, but those also work. They need range to really be effective.

 

BTW, any high DCV, low defense MA is laid low by the right Damage Aura. An uncontrolled Continuous attack can guarantee the opponent drops even if you drop first. Both fit in MP's.

 

Adjusting a defense should be halved' date=' yet adding directly to one shouldn’t. That doesn’t compute.[/quote']

 

The halving of impact on defenses for adjustment powers is, in my view, as easily viewed as a doubling of the cost of adjusting defensive powers. Are you suggesting the cost of +5 PD be doubled to 10? It doesn't cost double to add +5 PD at present, but it does cost double to Aid it by 5.

 

If optimizing in this fashion was allowable. Funny how none of the published characters have anything remotely resembling adjustable defenses.

 

If flexible defenses were so obviously non-abusive as you seem to be presenting, then surely it would be a regular occurrence.

 

Frankly, Armor/DCV is pretty close. If it's not allowable then, as you have said so often, show me the cite. And not everything non-abusive is seen commonly, or at all.

 

I don’t see a stop sign or GM option for charges of end reserve either.

 

I don't see them used in practice, and I'm not sure how you find this hugely abusive without being an obvious misuse of one or both of End Reserve and Charges.

 

It works perfectly if that’s what you want. +10 PD and +10 ED with lockout on one of them. That costs 15 or 17 pts depending on whether you make it a -1/2 or -1 limitation. And it makes adding Mental' date=' Flash, or Power defense slots considerably more expensive than 1 pt for 10.[/quote']

 

Buying 5 attack powers with Lockout also works perfectly. I don't believe the purpose of Lockout was to replace multipowers. It was to deal with abilities that, by the book, cannot go into multipowers. Defensive powers, by the book, can go into Multipowers.

 

Because it’s not as unbalancing as making yourself nigh invulnerable.

 

I don't find being nigh invulnerable to one type of damage to be as unbalancing as you do, but we've established that.

 

3 different spells in a spellbook

 

Which can only be used one at a time why? Do they have a "must be used at full power" limitation? Why? If not, then it is possible to bring each up in part, which is my flexible slot multipower.

 

I probably wouldn’t allow a gadgeteer who can change in the field. One who can in the lab isn’t a problem since he has to guess the proper configuration each time.

 

There's a lot of archetypes not allowed in your game, I think.

 

Yes it is a massive improvement. In the first case' date=' you beat Grond after a little delay and he has perhaps 1 turn to rampage. In the second case, you’re lying unconscious and Grond has minutes or longer to rampage. Sounds like a HUGE improvement to me.[/quote']

 

I'm not convinced you beat anyone. You also need a large enough attack to get damage through that he can't just recover. If he can't hurt you and you can't hurt him, he can just ignore you. Or pile half a dozen city buses on you so you'll stay out of the way.

 

90 pts for 5 potential 12 DC attacks vs 1 18 DC attack. Sounds fair to me.

 

18 pts for 15 pts of flexible defense and 3 slots vs 9/9 doesn’t sound fair to me.

 

Let's eliminate rounding from both, shall we? That would be 26 points for 20 flexible defense vs 13/13. Now, if I get smacked with an energy blast while using my 20 PD, or vice versa, I take an extra 7 STUN. Let's start with PD and ED of 12 each, so I would have 25 if I had no flexibile defenses. 25/25 is high based on the book suggestions for a 12 DC game, so let's use 12 DC. Let's use 40 Stun - I think we used it before.

 

NonFlex gets hit 3 times by any attack and is at -11. [42 - 25 = 17 per hit]

 

Flex gets hit with his favored attack 5 times and he's at -10. [42 - 32 = 10 per hit]

 

Flex takes one hit from his "not favored" attack and takes 30 Stun. Probably stunned; if not, 2 hits from his favored attack still puts him at -8.

 

Flex has to hight balanced due to a mix of opponents, he takes 20 per hit and is KO'd after 2 hits (exactly 0 Stun), with a third meaning he's not coming back.

 

Flex has the advantage only if he knows what defense to use throughout the fight. He still lacks an "auto-win", but has a marked advantage if he does know which defense to use.

 

That seems pretty similar to MultiMan having the right attack in his attacks multipower.

 

In the meantime' date=' Turtle Man has +3 on all his Pre based skills (since they almost always occur out of combat). And the one thing about Presence attacks is that Pre is highly visible (by definition), so unless it was a fear spell or something of that nature, Turtle Man doesn’t leave himself vulnerable vs most targets. I mean LionMane’s 60 Pre should be a dead giveaway. [/quote']

 

Adolf Hitler and Winston Churchill didn't look all that impressive. Neither does Captain America. Nothing says PRE is visible.

 

And how does TurtleMan decide whether to use his shell or his PRE resistance when faced with LionMane's 60 PRE visage and 4d6 HKA Claws?

 

He gives up the ability to attack. That’s pretty big.

 

Going desolid gave up his ability to attack. He lost that regardless of whether Desolid was a multipower slot.

 

I consider the PD/ED multipower as inappropriate as a Pre/PD multipower.

 

Given I would want to see a reasonable explanation for either, and be satisfied neither would, as built, unbalance my game, I'd also consider them equally inappropriate, so we agree on something. We just disagree on HOW inappropriate they both are.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Flex Dude has to set his MP. Perhaps this is part of the disconnect - in my little world, Multipowers don't have a set default that is up at all times unless the character is using a secific ability. The fact that the MP is configurable implies (to me - not universally) that it must be configured to be in operation.

 

Mind you, if Flex Dude always has his physical defense slot up, then anyone doing a bit of research will discover he's generally invulnerable to physical harm, so why would the Brick attack him to begin with?

 

[OFF TOPIC: I'm reminded of the Fallen Angel comic, where someone figures out she has to be focusing on invulnerability to be invulnerable, and catches her by surprise.]

 

Again, that's not the way everyone interprets a Multipower, but that interpretation could assist in managing flexible defenses.

 

Still doesn't change the fact that he has to hit in the first place and that the defender can be hitting back in the meantime.

 

 

15 Ego hit with 42 is Ego +5, so 11-. He has a 37.5% chance of being one punched by the ability. That's significant, in my books. And if he blows that roll, he's attacking his teammates for the next turn, until he gets the next one.

 

And a 62.5% chance of fighting back effectively. That sounds like he's pretty competitive to me.

 

Flex Boy needs to set his defenses right the first time. That's also luck.

 

He can just set it to a balanced slot until he has more info. Not a big deal. Whereas someone with one form of attack is SOL vs flex boy.

 

I tried to stay away from the stock answers, but those also work. They need range to really be effective.

 

Those particular attacks verge on being abusive, so I would either not allow them or put very strict limits on them.

 

BTW, any high DCV, low defense MA is laid low by the right Damage Aura. An uncontrolled Continuous attack can guarantee the opponent drops even if you drop first. Both fit in MP's.

 

He's still competitve. He still has the opportunity to take out his opponent first. Uncontrolled continuous implies low dice, so that gives him several phases to win the fight and find the means to turn it off.

 

 

The halving of impact on defenses for adjustment powers is, in my view, as easily viewed as a doubling of the cost of adjusting defensive powers. Are you suggesting the cost of +5 PD be doubled to 10? It doesn't cost double to add +5 PD at present, but it does cost double to Aid it by 5.

 

I'm suggesting that balanced slots be the only ones allowed in a mp. That way you buy +5 PD/+5 ED for 10 pts. Problem solved, and meshes with every published example I've seen of defenses in a mp.

 

Frankly, Armor/DCV is pretty close. If it's not allowable then, as you have said so often, show me the cite. And not everything non-abusive is seen commonly, or at all.

 

Skills as powers are special powers and need specific GM permission to be used in a power framework. Obviously Black Paladin and Mechassassin had GM permission.

 

Now for the umpteenth time, show me an example of a published character with an adjustable defensive multipower.

 

 

I don't see them used in practice, and I'm not sure how you find this hugely abusive without being an obvious misuse of one or both of End Reserve and Charges.

 

Of course it's an obvious abuse. But the book doesn't specifically warn against it. Just like the flexible multipower is an obvious abuse. Also, I don't see defensive multipowers used in practice either.

 

Buying 5 attack powers with Lockout also works perfectly. I don't believe the purpose of Lockout was to replace multipowers. It was to deal with abilities that, by the book, cannot go into multipowers. Defensive powers, by the book, can go into Multipowers.

 

The question wasn't whether it was book legal. The question was whether it was abusive.

 

 

I don't find being nigh invulnerable to one type of damage to be as unbalancing as you do, but we've established that.

 

I don't if that defense is fixed. An adjustable one is unbalancing.

 

 

Which can only be used one at a time why? Do they have a "must be used at full power" limitation? Why? If not, then it is possible to bring each up in part, which is my flexible slot multipower.

 

Spell of Stoneskin (PD). Spell of Energy Resistance (ED). Spell of Iron Body (balanced). 3 discrete spells.

 

There's a lot of archetypes not allowed in your game, I think.

 

Most games disallow lots of archetypes. The mentalist sniper who attacks from miles away with mindscan comes to mind.

 

 

I'm not convinced you beat anyone. You also need a large enough attack to get damage through that he can't just recover. If he can't hurt you and you can't hurt him, he can just ignore you. Or pile half a dozen city buses on you so you'll stay out of the way.

 

If I can hurt him and he can't hurt me, I'll eventually win. That shouldn't even be arguable. In any case, it's a lot better than fixed defense guy who'll be in GM option land while Grond has minutes or longer to rampage.

 

Let's eliminate rounding from both, shall we? That would be 26 points for 20 flexible defense vs 13/13. Now, if I get smacked with an energy blast while using my 20 PD, or vice versa, I take an extra 7 STUN. Let's start with PD and ED of 12 each, so I would have 25 if I had no flexibile defenses. 25/25 is high based on the book suggestions for a 12 DC game, so let's use 12 DC. Let's use 40 Stun - I think we used it before.

 

NonFlex gets hit 3 times by any attack and is at -11. [42 - 25 = 17 per hit]

 

Flex gets hit with his favored attack 5 times and he's at -10. [42 - 32 = 10 per hit]

 

Flex takes one hit from his "not favored" attack and takes 30 Stun. Probably stunned; if not, 2 hits from his favored attack still puts him at -8.

 

Flex has to hight balanced due to a mix of opponents, he takes 20 per hit and is KO'd after 2 hits (exactly 0 Stun), with a third meaning he's not coming back.

 

Flex has the advantage only if he knows what defense to use throughout the fight. He still lacks an "auto-win", but has a marked advantage if he does know which defense to use.

 

That seems pretty similar to MultiMan having the right attack in his attacks multipower.

 

 

Funny how you're counting a 60 pt multipower as 60 pts even though it actually cost 90 pts while you're counting exact costs for the defensive multipower. Why would you treat them differently unless there WAS a fundamental difference between an attack and defense multipower?

 

Let's start with 15 base defense and 25/25 for fixed boy (to parallel attack multipowers). A 12 DC attack vs fixed boy results in 17 stun on average and 40/17 = 2.35 hits needed. Vs the favored defense, it's 42-35 =7 stun or 40/7= 5.71 hits needed. That's a gain of 3.36 hits. And frankly, that pretty much guarantees the fight to flex boy since if he has similar 12 DC attacks and the other guy has normal defenses, he's knock the other guy out in 2.35 hits. Vs the other defense, it'll be 27 stun which is 1.48 hits on average. A loss of .87 hits. True it may stun him, but it's not that unlikely that the attack would roll 4 less than average. And a higher con reduces the chances significantly. There are several other factors:

 

1) Attacks will hit the favored defenses more often since smart players only put up a favored defense if they perceive it to be to their advantage.

 

2) Flex boy can always play it safe if he's not sure and use the balance slot.

 

3) Flex boy will only be hit once at his weak defense. After that, he can adjust. And this will be the minority of hits anyway.

 

4) Even if he guesses wrong, it's still a competitive fight. It's not out of the question that he hits his enemy 2.35 times before he's hit 1.48 times.

 

 

Adolf Hitler and Winston Churchill didn't look all that impressive. Neither does Captain America. Nothing says PRE is visible.

 

I heavily disagree with Captain America. He does look impressive. AH and WC both probably have 18-20 Pre which would be an annoyance if they pull a Pre attack. Someone with a 60 Pre as you used with LionMane would most certainly look fearsome.

 

 

And how does TurtleMan decide whether to use his shell or his PRE resistance when faced with LionMane's 60 PRE visage and 4d6 HKA Claws?

 

Frankly, he's only 2 pts worse off than if he just straight Pre. No big deal. Against the VAST majority of foes without extreme Pre, he's far better off.

 

I can safely say with decades of experience that the ability to shift Pre to defense is well worth 2 pts even if it occasionally backfires.

 

 

Going desolid gave up his ability to attack. He lost that regardless of whether Desolid was a multipower slot.

 

Exactly. By switching to the desolid slot, he's lost his ability to attack.

 

Given I would want to see a reasonable explanation for either, and be satisfied neither would, as built, unbalance my game, I'd also consider them equally inappropriate, so we agree on something. We just disagree on HOW inappropriate they both are.

 

The PD/ED multipower is what we've been discussing for pages. If you don't think it's an appropriate construct, then why have you posted pages trying to defend it?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

He can just set it to a balanced slot until he has more info. Not a big deal. Whereas someone with one form of attack is SOL vs flex boy.

 

He can set it to a balanced slot, at which point he will have lower defenses than Fixed Defense Man and be taken out faster. Not a lot lower, but still lower.

 

I'm suggesting that balanced slots be the only ones allowed in a mp. That way you buy +5 PD/+5 ED for 10 pts. Problem solved' date=' and meshes with every published example I've seen of defenses in a mp.[/quote']

 

You're suggesting that the Spell of Stoneskin and Spell of Fire Resistance cannot be in the mage's multipower.

 

Neither can "Mind Blank" (ego defense) or "Shield Eyes" (Sight Flash Defense). A defensive multipower need not simply select between PD and ED. How does your "solution" deal with exotic defenses. Note that they can be in a MP as part of a force field.

 

Skills as powers are special powers and need specific GM permission to be used in a power framework. Obviously Black Paladin and Mechassassin had GM permission.

 

Now for the umpteenth time, show me an example of a published character with an adjustable defensive multipower.

 

Now for the umpteenth time, show me an explicit published statement that an adjustable defensive multipower is not permitted, is permitted with GM permission only (like skills in a MP) or is even cautioned against.

 

Of course it's an obvious abuse. But the book doesn't specifically warn against it. Just like the flexible multipower is an obvious abuse. Also' date=' I don't see defensive multipowers used in practice either.[/quote']

 

Mechassassin and Black Paladin have defensive multipowers (see above).

 

The question wasn't whether it was book legal. The question was whether it was abusive.

 

Your consistent demands for a published character imply you feel an ability that's not published isn't just abusive (like DCV and defenses slots in a multipower) but is not permitted, thus not book legal.

 

I don't if that defense is fixed. An adjustable one is unbalancing.

 

Whether I get a 75 PD by purchasing it outright or by flexible defenses, Grond still falls under your example scenario. If that's unbalanced, both characters are unbalanced.

 

Spell of Stoneskin (PD). Spell of Energy Resistance (ED). Spell of Iron Body (balanced). 3 discrete spells.

 

I'm still waiting for you to tell me why only one can be cast at a time...

 

If I can hurt him and he can't hurt me' date=' I'll eventually win. That shouldn't even be arguable. In any case, it's a lot better than fixed defense guy who'll be in GM option land while Grond has minutes or longer to rampage.[/quote']

 

Hypothetical EXTREME EXAMPLE character: Zippy. Zippy has no attacks. None. Can't inflict a single point of Stun. He does, however, have Desolid only to pass through solid objects (affects carried objects), a speed of 12, Danger Sense (28-), 60 CON, 200 Stun, 15rPD and 15rED, and Megascale running.

 

Zippy is a thief. He's come to steal something. If you hit him - even once - he soaks it up with his high CON and STUN, then runs away.

 

You can hurt Zippy. Zippy cannot hurt you. I suggest you will never beat Zippy.

 

Funny how you're counting a 60 pt multipower as 60 pts even though it actually cost 90 pts while you're counting exact costs for the defensive multipower. Why would you treat them differently unless there WAS a fundamental difference between an attack and defense multipower?

 

I've already stated I would consider allowing a character lacking flexibility to have higher attacks, just as I would allow a character lacking flexibility to have higher average defenses. As well, if you are going to do a cost comparison, you need to actually use comparative costs. I would have thought that to be reasonably obvious.

 

Let's start with 15 base defense and 25/25 for fixed boy (to parallel attack multipowers). A 12 DC attack vs fixed boy results in 17 stun on average and 40/17 = 2.35 hits needed. Vs the favored defense' date=' it's 42-35 =7 stun or 40/7= 5.71 hits needed. That's a gain of 3.36 hits. And frankly, that pretty much guarantees the fight to flex boy since if he has similar 12 DC attacks and the other guy has normal defenses, he's knock the other guy out in 2.35 hits. Vs the other defense, it'll be 27 stun which is 1.48 hits on average. A loss of .87 hits. True it may stun him, but it's not that unlikely that the attack would roll 4 less than average. And a higher con reduces the chances significantly. There are several other factors:[/quote']

 

I have already acknowledged Flex Boy wins against an opponent he is able to customize against. One hit with his unfavoured attack does 27. 2 such hits, or one against that defense and 2 against his favoured defense, KO's him.

 

And, once again, you assume that I will allow the flexible character to have the option of matching the fixed defense character precisely, or of having superior defenses in one category, whichever suits him. If the characters are otherwise identical, I would have to be pretty stupid to allow this.

 

Gary, would your game allow for two absolutely identical characters, except that one has a 12d6 energy blast as his only attack, and the other may choose between a 12d6 energy blast and a 12d6 Flash? I would not. Nor would I allow one character to have campaign maximum fixed defenses, and another to choose between campaign maximum fixed defenses, or any tradeoff which totals the campaign maximum fixed defenses.

 

And Grond still crushes Flex Boy.

 

1) Attacks will hit the favored defenses more often since smart players only put up a favored defense if they perceive it to be to their advantage.

 

Yup. He has an advantage against targets with only one attack type. THIS IS HIS SCHTICK. Since this is his schtick, he would not be permitted to be as well defended against an attacker with multiple attack types as Fixed defense Man, whose schtick is being quite resistant to all forms of attack.

 

2) Flex boy can always play it safe if he's not sure and use the balance slot.

 

Which, as noted above, would provide him with lower defenses against any attack than Fixed has, all other things being equal, if the GM has any competence whatsoever.

 

3) Flex boy will only be hit once at his weak defense. After that' date=' he can adjust. And this will be the minority of hits anyway.[/quote']

 

In my experience, the combats where Flex Boy need worry about only one type of attack will also be in the minority.

 

4) Even if he guesses wrong' date=' it's still a competitive fight. It's not out of the question that he hits his enemy 2.35 times before he's hit 1.48 times.[/quote']

 

Assuming he wasn't stunned by that first 27 point hit...

 

Overall, your concerns seem to assume a very stupid GM who will not consider the balance between the PC's or the challenge a given encounter will pose. Do your games commonly start with the GM making a random selection of published characters to be tonight's opposition?

 

I heavily disagree with Captain America. He does look impressive. AH and WC both probably have 18-20 Pre which would be an annoyance if they pull a Pre attack. Someone with a 60 Pre as you used with LionMane would most certainly look fearsome.

 

Cap looks like a normal human being. AH and WC were both able to accomplish some pretty impressive things with their PRE. In any case, we both agree they were well above baseline (8-10) PRE, yet their pictures don't show any sign of great PRE. At what level does PRE become visible, in your opinion? One example of a highly persuasive and, I would say, high PRE character in recent fiction is Darth Sidious. The senator doesn't look very impressive, but he demonstrates a very high PRE.

 

Frankly, he's only 2 pts worse off than if he just straight Pre. No big deal. Against the VAST majority of foes without extreme Pre, he's far better off.

 

I can safely say with decades of experience that the ability to shift Pre to defense is well worth 2 pts even if it occasionally backfires.

 

How much is his PRE with and without the multipower? If he has a 30 to start with, how much is the extra 10 worth? And how does that match his stated timidity while in his armor?

 

As to "decades of experience", you've played for 20+ years with a character who has a PRE/DEfense multipower? If it's so abusive, why have you not put a stop to it?

 

I can also state that, if a player in my game decided "PRE is no big deal - I'll make it 8 and shave some points", I'd start looking a lot closer at casual PRE attacks. Normally, I'm pretty confident that a character making no conscious effort to intimidate won't intimidate the PC's, since they have 18+ PRE. But they will impress bystanders, and that's the PRE level PointShavingMan has decided to select. If that's the level TurtleMan ends up at, he'll be just as easily impressed.

 

Finally, what stops Lionmane from using his high PRE and his claws at the same time? PRE attacks don't take time. Everyone else gets their PRE and their defenses at the same time. TurtleMan doesn't.

 

Exactly. By switching to the desolid slot' date=' he's lost his ability to attack.[/quote']

 

I would almost think you are being intentionally dense. By becoming desolid, he loses the ability to attack. If he bought Desolid outside the multipower, he still couldn't effectively attack while desolid. He loses that ability regardless of whether his Desolid was, or was not, in his multipower. Thus, making Desolid a multipower slot, and saving 54 points over having 0 END desolid outside his multipower, has absolutely no down side.

 

The PD/ED multipower is what we've been discussing for pages. If you don't think it's an appropriate construct' date=' then why have you posted pages trying to defend it?[/quote']

 

I didn't say it was "not appropriate". I said it was "equally inappropriate". Similarly, I would consider a 60 STR and a 12d6 EB "equally inappropriate" in a 12DC attack. Neither is any more inappropriate than the other. Sorry to be too subtle for you.

 

I'm not arguing that either one can NEVER be abusive. Take a worst case scenario, and just about anything can be made abusive. I AM saying that I do not agree with your opinion that the fact certain constructs CAN be abused means that they are ALWAYS ABUSIVE in whatever fashion they are used, and therefore should be banned, rather than considered in the context of the character as a whole.

 

You seem to perceive this as a binary selection, that is either:

 

(a) flexible defenses can never be allowed, not ever, don't even consider it,

 

( flexible defenses if allowed must be allowed on any character, in any combination, no matter what.

 

I perceive a much broader middle ground where, as with most abilities in Hero, the GM exercises his judgement to allow characters (not power constructs) that will not unbalance his game, and disallow characters (again, not power constructs) that pose an excessive risk of unbalancing his game.

 

In other words, I assume a smart GM and reasonable players. You seem to assume unreasonable min/maxer players and a GM lacking any real brainpower or understanding of his game.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Thinking furthr, Gary, I'm curious about your experiences as a player.

 

Have you generally, as a smart player (no question there) designed min/max monstrosity characters that your GMs have been either too stupid to identify as problematic (either before or during play) or too spineless to either deny the character before play started or require be changed for balance once the problem became clear?

 

I'm curious what type of play experience leads to your desire to eliminate any construct which could possibly be unbalanced in any circumstance.

[bjvargas]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Part of what you're seeing may be based on standards for the Superhero genre. You often have energy projectors in the comics use their attacks in a variety of ways' date=' but how common are characters whose defenses are visibly adjustable?[/quote']

 

Depends on what you mean by 'Common'.

 

Just saw Fantastic Four over the weekend which made me think about everyone's powers again. I have always pictured Sue's force field stuff as being in an MP with Var. Advantages or more likely a VPP with insta-changes to it, rather than being built in a highly limiting EC. She just does too many varied things with it for it to be in an EC.

 

I am sure there are several other examples out there, but not that my brain is working well enough to think of them at the moment...

 

BJ

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

He can set it to a balanced slot' date=' at which point he will have lower defenses than Fixed Defense Man and be taken out faster. Not a lot lower, but still lower.[/quote']

 

Trivial. And the payoff once he gets the info is nigh invulnerability.

 

 

You're suggesting that the Spell of Stoneskin and Spell of Fire Resistance cannot be in the mage's multipower.

 

Neither can "Mind Blank" (ego defense) or "Shield Eyes" (Sight Flash Defense). A defensive multipower need not simply select between PD and ED. How does your "solution" deal with exotic defenses. Note that they can be in a MP as part of a force field.

 

Buy them together or separately with lockout. That's just as conceptual as a multipower and less abusive.

 

Now for the umpteenth time, show me an explicit published statement that an adjustable defensive multipower is not permitted, is permitted with GM permission only (like skills in a MP) or is even cautioned against.

 

De facto statement is no published characters with such a structure. Now it's your turn to show me an example. I've only asked about a dozen times already.

 

Mechassassin and Black Paladin have defensive multipowers (see above).

 

Not with adjustable defenses.

 

Your consistent demands for a published character imply you feel an ability that's not published isn't just abusive (like DCV and defenses slots in a multipower) but is not permitted, thus not book legal.

 

Where did I ever say "not book legal"? There are a lot of things that are book legal such as charges of end reserve that are highly abusive. And multipowers with adjustable defenses.

 

 

Whether I get a 75 PD by purchasing it outright or by flexible defenses, Grond still falls under your example scenario. If that's unbalanced, both characters are unbalanced.

 

You're paying twice as much if you want fixed defenses. Otherwise Firewing clobbers you. Flex boy can destroy Grond or Firewing in a fight.

 

I'm still waiting for you to tell me why only one can be cast at a time...

 

Limited Mana.

 

Hypothetical EXTREME EXAMPLE character: Zippy. Zippy has no attacks. None. Can't inflict a single point of Stun. He does, however, have Desolid only to pass through solid objects (affects carried objects), a speed of 12, Danger Sense (28-), 60 CON, 200 Stun, 15rPD and 15rED, and Megascale running.

 

Zippy is a thief. He's come to steal something. If you hit him - even once - he soaks it up with his high CON and STUN, then runs away.

 

You can hurt Zippy. Zippy cannot hurt you. I suggest you will never beat Zippy.

 

Zippy doesn't fit the condition. I'll repeat since you didn't seem to pick it up. If I can hurt him and he can't hurt me, I'll eventually win

 

 

 

I've already stated I would consider allowing a character lacking flexibility to have higher attacks, just as I would allow a character lacking flexibility to have higher average defenses. As well, if you are going to do a cost comparison, you need to actually use comparative costs. I would have thought that to be reasonably obvious.

 

Ok, you previously said you would allow a single attacker to perhaps get 2DC over a flexible attacker, not 6DC. That's 70 pts vs 90, or alternately his slots are worth 1/3 of their normal cost for active point purposes (2 pts each). A corresponding 1/3 adjustment to the defensive multipower would allow 24 pts with 3 slots (30 active points but the 3 slots are collectively worth 2 pts for active point purposes). So +24 PD or +24 ED or +12/12. Or alternately he has 14/14 defenses and the 20 pt multipower.

 

That seems to be a fair way of using comparative costs.

 

 

I have already acknowledged Flex Boy wins against an opponent he is able to customize against. One hit with his unfavoured attack does 27. 2 such hits, or one against that defense and 2 against his favoured defense, KO's him.

 

Which considering it would take Flex boy 2.3 hits to take out his opposition means a fair fight even against someone with multiple forms of attacks.

 

And, once again, you assume that I will allow the flexible character to have the option of matching the fixed defense character precisely, or of having superior defenses in one category, whichever suits him. If the characters are otherwise identical, I would have to be pretty stupid to allow this.

 

Gary, would your game allow for two absolutely identical characters, except that one has a 12d6 energy blast as his only attack, and the other may choose between a 12d6 energy blast and a 12d6 Flash? I would not. Nor would I allow one character to have campaign maximum fixed defenses, and another to choose between campaign maximum fixed defenses, or any tradeoff which totals the campaign maximum fixed defenses.

 

Yay! Recognition that you have to treat a defensive multipower different from an attack multipower!

 

 

Yup. He has an advantage against targets with only one attack type. THIS IS HIS SCHTICK. Since this is his schtick, he would not be permitted to be as well defended against an attacker with multiple attack types as Fixed defense Man, whose schtick is being quite resistant to all forms of attack.

 

I've made the adjustments to his defense above. Not much changes with my analysis.

 

Which, as noted above, would provide him with lower defenses against any attack than Fixed has, all other things being equal, if the GM has any competence whatsoever.

 

25 to 24. Doesn't change the analysis much.

 

 

In my experience, the combats where Flex Boy need worry about only one type of attack will also be in the minority.

 

If every combat was a team vs team perhaps. A broad range of encounters means that there will be quite a few vs 1 form attackers.

 

Assuming he wasn't stunned by that first 27 point hit...

 

Which still has to hit which means he still has the chance to inflict 2.35 hits first.

 

 

Overall, your concerns seem to assume a very stupid GM who will not consider the balance between the PC's or the challenge a given encounter will pose. Do your games commonly start with the GM making a random selection of published characters to be tonight's opposition?

 

 

If every NPC was geared specifically to counter Flex boy, that would strain credibility.

 

Do your games always involve the NPC optimized specifically to deal with the PC?

 

Cap looks like a normal human being. AH and WC were both able to accomplish some pretty impressive things with their PRE. In any case, we both agree they were well above baseline (8-10) PRE, yet their pictures don't show any sign of great PRE. At what level does PRE become visible, in your opinion? One example of a highly persuasive and, I would say, high PRE character in recent fiction is Darth Sidious. The senator doesn't look very impressive, but he demonstrates a very high PRE.

 

Cap does not look like just a normal human being in uniform. AH and WC accomplished some pretty impressive stuff out of combat. I somehow doubt that it would've done much for AH if a Russian squad broke into the Berlin Bunker in 1945.

 

I would say Darth Maul or Darth Vader had 30-35 Pre. Highly visible. Now throw someone with a 60 and it becomes pretty much impossible to hide.

 

 

How much is his PRE with and without the multipower? If he has a 30 to start with, how much is the extra 10 worth? And how does that match his stated timidity while in his armor?

 

He may have a 10 or 15 to start. That extra 10 is worth +2 to all Pre based skills which is a bargain for 2 pts.

 

As to "decades of experience", you've played for 20+ years with a character who has a PRE/DEfense multipower? If it's so abusive, why have you not put a stop to it?

 

I've played 20+ years knowing that the ability to switch 10-15 pts to my defense from pre is worth a whole lot more than 2 pts. If you don't agree with that statement, then I really question how much you've actually played the game.

 

 

I can also state that, if a player in my game decided "PRE is no big deal - I'll make it 8 and shave some points", I'd start looking a lot closer at casual PRE attacks. Normally, I'm pretty confident that a character making no conscious effort to intimidate won't intimidate the PC's, since they have 18+ PRE. But they will impress bystanders, and that's the PRE level PointShavingMan has decided to select. If that's the level TurtleMan ends up at, he'll be just as easily impressed.

 

Finally, what stops Lionmane from using his high PRE and his claws at the same time? PRE attacks don't take time. Everyone else gets their PRE and their defenses at the same time. TurtleMan doesn't.

 

LionMane with a 60 Pre represents less than 1% of plausible encounters in any world. At the cost of a whopping 2 pts, Turtle Man is disadvantaged vs LionMane. Vs the other 99% of encounters, he gains a huge advantage. Sounds like a bargain to me.

 

 

I would almost think you are being intentionally dense. By becoming desolid, he loses the ability to attack. If he bought Desolid outside the multipower, he still couldn't effectively attack while desolid. He loses that ability regardless of whether his Desolid was, or was not, in his multipower. Thus, making Desolid a multipower slot, and saving 54 points over having 0 END desolid outside his multipower, has absolutely no down side.

 

I think you're the one being intentionally dense. Remember what I said above: If I can hurt him and he can't hurt me, I'll eventually win.

 

Now tell me how someone desolid can fit that condition?

 

Giving up your attack is huge and changes the equation completely.

 

 

I didn't say it was "not appropriate". I said it was "equally inappropriate". Similarly, I would consider a 60 STR and a 12d6 EB "equally inappropriate" in a 12DC attack. Neither is any more inappropriate than the other. Sorry to be too subtle for you.

 

I'm not arguing that either one can NEVER be abusive. Take a worst case scenario, and just about anything can be made abusive. I AM saying that I do not agree with your opinion that the fact certain constructs CAN be abused means that they are ALWAYS ABUSIVE in whatever fashion they are used, and therefore should be banned, rather than considered in the context of the character as a whole.

 

You seem to perceive this as a binary selection, that is either:

 

(a) flexible defenses can never be allowed, not ever, don't even consider it,

 

( flexible defenses if allowed must be allowed on any character, in any combination, no matter what.

 

I perceive a much broader middle ground where, as with most abilities in Hero, the GM exercises his judgement to allow characters (not power constructs) that will not unbalance his game, and disallow characters (again, not power constructs) that pose an excessive risk of unbalancing his game.

 

In other words, I assume a smart GM and reasonable players. You seem to assume unreasonable min/maxer players and a GM lacking any real brainpower or understanding of his game.

 

I'll leave you with a previous statement:

 

The theory that "the GM will balance it out" is commonly raised as a defense to issues of point imbalance. The GM can certainly do so. However, if the GM will juggle the books in this fashion, such that the point imbalance is unimportant, why do we need points at all?

 

 

Thinking furthr, Gary, I'm curious about your experiences as a player.

 

Have you generally, as a smart player (no question there) designed min/max monstrosity characters that your GMs have been either too stupid to identify as problematic (either before or during play) or too spineless to either deny the character before play started or require be changed for balance once the problem became clear?

 

I'm curious what type of play experience leads to your desire to eliminate any construct which could possibly be unbalanced in any circumstance.

 

It's a fundamental question of fairness and a belief that the cost of something should reflect its value.

 

I don't automatically eliminate anything that can be unbalancing, but I always err to the side of fairness.

 

I do note that even you in this thread seem to outright ban a multipower with both defenses and movements in it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Buy them together or separately with lockout. That's just as conceptual as a multipower and less abusive.

 

If this were the answer, then the system should eliminate multipowers (probably VPP's as well) in favour of variants of the Lockout limitation. Otherwise, we need a huge array of legal/illegal combinations in a Multipower.

 

De facto statement is no published characters with such a structure. Now it's your turn to show me an example. I've only asked about a dozen times already.

 

I'll look for one just as soon as you give me the page reference that cites any concerns about defensive multipowers. The books are silent. They don't provide examples of this construct in use, nor do they give any indication that such a multipower, which is perfectly book legal, is any more problematic than any other book legal construct.

 

You're paying twice as much if you want fixed defenses. Otherwise Firewing clobbers you. Flex boy can destroy Grond or Firewing in a fight.

 

First, I would not let a character have sufficient defenses to be invulnerable to Grond's punch and Firewing's energy attacks simultaneously. That WOULD clearly be unbalanced. Second, Flex Boy will lose to Firewing, who can use a his NND or a punch, move by or move through to inflict physical damage. He can Grab Flex Boy and raise both his Damage Shields (one at a time due to the EC rules...) to inflcit physical and energy at the same time.

 

Second, to defeat Firewing, Flex Boy needs to inflict over 25 STUN per turn (FW's REC) past his 40 defenses (20 natural + 20 force field). Assuming a 5 SPD, that means rolling better than 45 per phase, average, and never missing a 10 DCV (12 if FW wants to use his levels). Good luck with that!

 

To beat Grond, you need to average over 28 STUN per turn against 40 PD or 30 ED, so an energy attacker could pull it off - Grond's not as great at dodging. But then, Gron's status as a "team opponent" doesn't hold up in 5e anyway.

 

Ok' date=' you previously said you would allow a single attacker to perhaps get 2DC over a flexible attacker, not 6DC. That's 70 pts vs 90, or alternately his slots are worth 1/3 of their normal cost for active point purposes (2 pts each). A corresponding 1/3 adjustment to the defensive multipower would allow 24 pts with 3 slots (30 active points but the 3 slots are collectively worth 2 pts for active point purposes). So +24 PD or +24 ED or +12/12. Or alternately he has 14/14 defenses and the 20 pt multipower.[/quote']

 

If a player came back to me with his redesigned Flex Multipower based on your argument after I'd already told him what I would, and would not, allow in the game, can you guess what my response would be? Probably "Go show your flexible defense multipower to Gary and see if he's going to allow it".

 

The multipower as written provides a huge discount for multiple powers. If I thought it was unbalanced (after 20+ years of using them in my games), I'd be looking to adjust them overall. But, if they were that unbalanced, I suspect the rules would have long since been changed.

 

Which considering it would take Flex boy 2.3 hits to take out his opposition means a fair fight even against someone with multiple forms of attacks.

 

Since I had to get the book anyway...(I'll misclassify someone, of course)

 

Villains with multiple attack types (agents and robots ignored): Dr. Destroyer, Gigaton, Gravitar, Menton, Takofanes, Warlord, War Cry, Warhead, Warpath, Dark Seraph, Bloodstone, Force, Phoenix, Fiacho, Mentalla, Scorpia, Bluejay, Psimon, Hypnos, Lancer, Medusa, Mind Slayer, Torment, Radium, Ankylosaur, Anubis, Armadillo, Black Harlequin, Black Paladin, Brainchild, Cap Chronos, Firewing, Foxbat, Herculan,Holocaust, Hornet, Howler (+1 var = NND), Lady Blue, Leech, Lodestone, Mechassassin, Menagerie, Mirage, Nebula, Photon, Riptide, Shadowdragon, Shrinker, Slug, Stormfront, Tessaract, Thorn, Thunderbird, Utility, Vibron, Zephyr, Zorran [57]

 

Villains with one attack type (standard defenses): War Machine, Eclipse, Temblor, Durak, Feurmacher, Ultrasonique (though I'd give him an AVLD), Black Diamond, Cheshire Cat, Binder, Blackstar, Cyclone, Slick, Thunderbolt I, Blowtorch, Bulldozer, Cateran, Fenris, Gargantua, Grond, Lazer, Masquerade, Monster, Morningstar, Ogre, Thunderbolt II, Zigzag [26]

 

Villains with one attack type (exotic defenses): Rakshasa, War Monger, Hummingbird, ESPER, [4]

 

Hard to Classify: Istvatha V'han, Cybermind

 

A lot of Bricks and Martial Artists on that 1 attack type list. If you're going to have high fixed defenses in only one category, pick PD...

 

Your turn: to list who is and is not easily beaten with a Flash attack.

 

Yay! Recognition that you have to treat a defensive multipower different from an attack multipower!

 

I would not allow a flexible attacker to have the highest DC's, over the maximum I would allow a non-flexible attacker. I won't allow a flexible defender to match the higherst defenses I would allow a fixed defender.

 

If every combat was a team vs team perhaps. A broad range of encounters means that there will be quite a few vs 1 form attackers.

 

A bit more than 1 in 3, provided I simply pick at random. Many are in teams, and many more are smart enough to realize a no win situation and get out. Since you've now indicated "gets away" is not "beaten", that reduces the number of characters that are auto-wins considerably. Not many of them will not be autowins for the guy with the same level of PD fixed, as the vast majority of one attack type characters use PD (bricks, MA's amd conventional weaponry).

 

If every NPC was geared specifically to counter Flex boy' date=' that would strain credibility.[/quote']

 

The percentages work for me. And Flex Boy has a schtick that should allow him the occasional easy win. Those simply won't be intended as serious challenges for Flex Boy, any more than Captain Ultra would be a serious nemesis for Captain Ultra (anyone but me remember Captain Ultra?)

 

Do your games always involve the NPC optimized specifically to deal with the PC?

 

If I intend a combat to be challenging, I certainly consider how the PC's might deal with the opposition, and how the opposition might deal with the PC's. I don't consider that "NPC optimized specifically to deal with the PC", but we've already established your and my terminology is often different. Do your games always involve the NPC selected strictly at random with no regard for PC abilities?

 

Cap does not look like just a normal human being in uniform. AH and WC accomplished some pretty impressive stuff out of combat. I somehow doubt that it would've done much for AH if a Russian squad broke into the Berlin Bunker in 1945.

 

Cap doesn't cow too many serious threats into surrender either. Even agents of Hydra fire on him.

 

I would say Darth Maul or Darth Vader had 30-35 Pre. Highly visible. Now throw someone with a 60 and it becomes pretty much impossible to hide.

 

Palpatine was no slouch in the PRE department, and he was very inobvious.

 

He may have a 10 or 15 to start. That extra 10 is worth +2 to all Pre based skills which is a bargain for 2 pts.

 

Let's be generous and give him 15. PRE +20 requires a roll of 35, or 10d6. Exhibit a power (+1d6), an extremely violent action (+2d6) and a good soliloquy (+1d6) and a 35 PRE will do, again on average, in combat (-1d6). And Turtle Man needs to decide whether to turn his PRE off (and risk a PRE attack before combat) or leave his defenses off (and risk a surprise attack). That's limiting. Whether it's limiting enough is a question of whether one considers Multipowers limited enough.

 

PRE - defense only is a -1 limitation (5er p 139). PRE - only for attacking is a similar -1. Applying the same -1 for "only for skills" would get 2.5 points for +1 to PRE skills that never gets shut off.

 

Again, multipowers save significant points for removing the ability to use abilities at the same time. That's not restricted to defensive multipowers, or to powers that would rarely or never be used at the same time.

 

I've played 20+ years knowing that the ability to switch 10-15 pts to my defense from pre is worth a whole lot more than 2 pts. If you don't agree with that statement' date=' then I really question how much you've actually played the game.[/quote']

 

It depends what you compare it to, and what the context is. I would, however, generally agree.

 

LionMane with a 60 Pre represents less than 1% of plausible encounters in any world. At the cost of a whopping 2 pts' date=' Turtle Man is disadvantaged vs LionMane. Vs the other 99% of encounters, he gains a huge advantage. Sounds like a bargain to me.[/quote']

 

Only a 35 PRE is actually needed, as set out above. However, trading off

 

I think you're the one being intentionally dense. Remember what I said above: If I can hurt him and he can't hurt me' date=' I'll eventually win[/i'].

 

Now tell me how someone desolid can fit that condition?

 

Giving up your attack is huge and changes the equation completely.

 

I'll say it again: When he turned on the Desolid, he lost the ability to attack. As such, losing the attacks themselves does not further limit him in any material way. It limits him EVEN LESS than giving up PRE or running, when in (or expecting) combat.

 

I do note that even you in this thread seem to outright ban a multipower with both defenses and movements in it.

 

I don't outright ban much, if anything. A character who must choose between very limited mobility and limited defenses may well be balanced. Again, show me the whole character in context and then I'd make my decision. If I ban a Multipower with movement and defenses, I ban the original example multipower character (Starburst?) and Ultra Boy of the Legion, neither of whom seem unbalanced to me.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

If this were the answer' date=' then the system should eliminate multipowers (probably VPP's as well) in favour of variants of the Lockout limitation. Otherwise, we need a huge array of legal/illegal combinations in a Multipower. [/quote']

 

 

No, because spot defenses are far more powerful than spot attacks. As shown numerous times in this thread.

 

 

I'll look for one just as soon as you give me the page reference that cites any concerns about defensive multipowers. The books are silent. They don't provide examples of this construct in use, nor do they give any indication that such a multipower, which is perfectly book legal, is any more problematic than any other book legal construct.

 

If the defensive multipower was no more problematic than an attack multipower for example, then why are the published characters loaded to the gills with attack multipowers, but not with defensive multipowers with adjustable defenses?

 

 

First, I would not let a character have sufficient defenses to be invulnerable to Grond's punch and Firewing's energy attacks simultaneously. That WOULD clearly be unbalanced. Second, Flex Boy will lose to Firewing, who can use a his NND or a punch, move by or move through to inflict physical damage. He can Grab Flex Boy and raise both his Damage Shields (one at a time due to the EC rules...) to inflcit physical and energy at the same time.

 

Second, to defeat Firewing, Flex Boy needs to inflict over 25 STUN per turn (FW's REC) past his 40 defenses (20 natural + 20 force field). Assuming a 5 SPD, that means rolling better than 45 per phase, average, and never missing a 10 DCV (12 if FW wants to use his levels). Good luck with that!

 

To beat Grond, you need to average over 28 STUN per turn against 40 PD or 30 ED, so an energy attacker could pull it off - Grond's not as great at dodging. But then, Gron's status as a "team opponent" doesn't hold up in 5e anyway.

 

Obviously if fighting Grond/Firewing, the point level is higher.

 

If you don't like the Firewing/Grond example, then we can lower the scale and use Ogre/Lazer. Fixed boy with 40/5 or 5/40 can fight only 1 of them. Flex boy can clobber both. Thus Flex boy is far more unbalanced than Fixed boy.

 

 

If a player came back to me with his redesigned Flex Multipower based on your argument after I'd already told him what I would, and would not, allow in the game, can you guess what my response would be? Probably "Go show your flexible defense multipower to Gary and see if he's going to allow it".

 

The multipower as written provides a huge discount for multiple powers. If I thought it was unbalanced (after 20+ years of using them in my games), I'd be looking to adjust them overall. But, if they were that unbalanced, I suspect the rules would have long since been changed.

 

 

IOW, you would treat defensive multipowers differently from attack multipowers. That was what I wanted to hear.

 

Since I had to get the book anyway...(I'll misclassify someone, of course)

 

Villains with multiple attack types (agents and robots ignored): Dr. Destroyer, Gigaton, Gravitar, Menton, Takofanes, Warlord, War Cry, Warhead, Warpath, Dark Seraph, Bloodstone, Force, Phoenix, Fiacho, Mentalla, Scorpia, Bluejay, Psimon, Hypnos, Lancer, Medusa, Mind Slayer, Torment, Radium, Ankylosaur, Anubis, Armadillo, Black Harlequin, Black Paladin, Brainchild, Cap Chronos, Firewing, Foxbat, Herculan,Holocaust, Hornet, Howler (+1 var = NND), Lady Blue, Leech, Lodestone, Mechassassin, Menagerie, Mirage, Nebula, Photon, Riptide, Shadowdragon, Shrinker, Slug, Stormfront, Tessaract, Thorn, Thunderbird, Utility, Vibron, Zephyr, Zorran [57]

 

Villains with one attack type (standard defenses): War Machine, Eclipse, Temblor, Durak, Feurmacher, Ultrasonique (though I'd give him an AVLD), Black Diamond, Cheshire Cat, Binder, Blackstar, Cyclone, Slick, Thunderbolt I, Blowtorch, Bulldozer, Cateran, Fenris, Gargantua, Grond, Lazer, Masquerade, Monster, Morningstar, Ogre, Thunderbolt II, Zigzag [26]

 

Villains with one attack type (exotic defenses): Rakshasa, War Monger, Hummingbird, ESPER, [4]

 

Hard to Classify: Istvatha V'han, Cybermind

 

A lot of Bricks and Martial Artists on that 1 attack type list. If you're going to have high fixed defenses in only one category, pick PD...

 

Your turn: to list who is and is not easily beaten with a Flash attack.

 

Anyone with a reasonably high DCV or flash defense or a targetting sense can beat a Flash attacker. This is because the flash attacker still has to hit before being hit 2-3 times, which is quite plausible if the defender has equal CV to the attacker. Now the people with single attacks are basically SOL if they need 6-8 hits to take out Flex boy and Flex boy needs 2-3 hits to take them out.

 

I would not allow a flexible attacker to have the highest DC's, over the maximum I would allow a non-flexible attacker. I won't allow a flexible defender to match the higherst defenses I would allow a fixed defender.

 

The example gives flex boy lower total defenses than fixed boy.

 

 

A bit more than 1 in 3, provided I simply pick at random. Many are in teams, and many more are smart enough to realize a no win situation and get out. Since you've now indicated "gets away" is not "beaten", that reduces the number of characters that are auto-wins considerably. Not many of them will not be autowins for the guy with the same level of PD fixed, as the vast majority of one attack type characters use PD (bricks, MA's amd conventional weaponry).

 

Don't forget foes like Viper 5 teams and Demon Morbanes which generally use energy attacks. Ignoring exotic attacks there are 3 possibilities (assuming Flex boy has 40/10 or some unbalanced defense of that nature):

 

1) Vs someone with only physical attacks, both Fixed and Flex will clobber

 

2) Vs someone with only energy attacks, Fixed gets destroyed and Flex clobbers.

 

3) Vs someone with both attacks, Fixed gets destroyed and Flex is competitive.

 

Sounds like Flex is far better off to me...

 

The percentages work for me. And Flex Boy has a schtick that should allow him the occasional easy win. Those simply won't be intended as serious challenges for Flex Boy, any more than Captain Ultra would be a serious nemesis for Captain Ultra (anyone but me remember Captain Ultra?)

 

It's not an "occasional" easy win just from your research.

 

If I intend a combat to be challenging, I certainly consider how the PC's might deal with the opposition, and how the opposition might deal with the PC's. I don't consider that "NPC optimized specifically to deal with the PC", but we've already established your and my terminology is often different. Do your games always involve the NPC selected strictly at random with no regard for PC abilities?

 

Depends on the situation. Hunteds would certainly be designed with the PCs in mind and so would master villains. For rank and file villains, I would certainly want the ability to throw a good selection of villains. I wouldn't want to rule out entire common archetypes because the PC has a defensive multipower.

 

 

Cap doesn't cow too many serious threats into surrender either. Even agents of Hydra fire on him.

 

Cap certainly does a lot better than AH would've.

 

 

Palpatine was no slouch in the PRE department, and he was very inobvious.

 

His full Pre only took effect when he revealed himself. In ROTJ, his Pre was VERY obvious.

 

Let's be generous and give him 15. PRE +20 requires a roll of 35, or 10d6. Exhibit a power (+1d6), an extremely violent action (+2d6) and a good soliloquy (+1d6) and a 35 PRE will do, again on average, in combat (-1d6). And Turtle Man needs to decide whether to turn his PRE off (and risk a PRE attack before combat) or leave his defenses off (and risk a surprise attack). That's limiting. Whether it's limiting enough is a question of whether one considers Multipowers limited enough.

 

Extremely violent in the context of a superhero or supervillain means much more than a 4d6 HKA. That may qualify vs agents, but I wouldn't give that bonus unless it's quite apparent that the level of power is significantly higher than the PC's. So 45 Pre, assuming the good soliloquy also applies.

 

If you allowed anyone to get the 2d6 violent action mod at any time, then anybody can quite easily make characters with 5 lower Pre lose a half phase half the time or more.

 

And this only would be applicable if Turtle Man was suprised by the Pre attack, otherwise he can set the mp into Pre.

 

 

PRE - defense only is a -1 limitation (5er p 139). PRE - only for attacking is a similar -1. Applying the same -1 for "only for skills" would get 2.5 points for +1 to PRE skills that never gets shut off.

 

Again, multipowers save significant points for removing the ability to use abilities at the same time. That's not restricted to defensive multipowers, or to powers that would rarely or never be used at the same time.

 

Skills only would be 5 pts according to your example. Since this Pre can also be used for offense and defense at the cost of some defense, the overall value is probably about 8 pts for 10 Pre.

 

It depends what you compare it to, and what the context is. I would, however, generally agree.

 

I think it's pretty much a nobrainer that

 

10 MP

1 u +10 Pre

1 u +5/5 Def

 

is worth far more than just +10 Pre. I don't even know why you were quibbling about it.

 

Only a 35 PRE is actually needed, as set out above. However, trading off

 

45 Pre, unless the violent power is well beyond the power level of the target.

 

I'll say it again: When he turned on the Desolid, he lost the ability to attack. As such, losing the attacks themselves does not further limit him in any material way. It limits him EVEN LESS than giving up PRE or running, when in (or expecting) combat.

 

And I'll say it again. Going desolid in a MP isn't unbalancing because the character can't attack effectively. I've said it multiple times in this thread that nigh invulnerability is unbalancing when the nigh invulnerable person can affect the opponent.

 

 

 

I don't outright ban much, if anything. A character who must choose between very limited mobility and limited defenses may well be balanced. Again, show me the whole character in context and then I'd make my decision. If I ban a Multipower with movement and defenses, I ban the original example multipower character (Starburst?) and Ultra Boy of the Legion, neither of whom seem unbalanced to me.

 

Puh-leeze. Starburst's multipower isn't what we've been talking about. Try a multipower with adjustable defenses, some movements, and perhaps some utility powers. For example:

 

15

1 u +15 PD

1 u +15 ED

1 u +8/+7

1 u +7" Running

1 u +15" Leap

1 u +7" Flight

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

No' date=' because spot defenses are far more powerful than spot attacks. As shown numerous times in this thread.[/quote']

 

We simply differ on the extent to which this issue exists, and whether it bes best handled by banning of any concept of spot defenses, or by GM judgement, so there's no point you reiterating it or me responding to it.

 

If the defensive multipower was no more problematic than an attack multipower for example' date=' then why are the published characters loaded to the gills with attack multipowers, but not with defensive multipowers with adjustable defenses?[/quote']

 

More reiteration of an area where we disagree on relevance. In large part, that question is the impetus of the thread. In 1e Champions, the Multipower is presented as a way to have a number of powers that trade off, with Starburst (Flight, Force Field and EB) presented as the archetypal example. This quickly (by Enemies I) evolved into the attack multipower as we know it today. But the same thing never evolved defensively.

 

Gary, that's one reason I disagree with your "published character" theory. If the issue were vast overpowering, logically we should have seen examples of defensive multipowers in earlier editions (just like we say adjustment powers affecting defenses), leading to various gamers realizing these were overpowered. We never saw that evolution.

 

Obviously if fighting Grond/Firewing' date=' the point level is higher.[/quote']

 

I've used both in standard point level games, but they're opponents for a team, not for an individual, in that context.

 

If you don't like the Firewing/Grond example' date=' then we can lower the scale and use Ogre/Lazer. Fixed boy with 40/5 or 5/40 can fight only 1 of them. Flex boy can clobber both. Thus Flex boy is far more unbalanced than Fixed boy.[/quote']

 

Again, you're assuming that a GM who would require a character with 40 PD fixed have a 5 ED, also fixed, to be acceptable in the game would also accept a flexible defense character who could choose from the same 40/5, or 5/40, or (based on your prior comments) either any mix between or 23/22. That extra flexibility, to me, would be accounted for by requiring a lower average defense.

 

IOW' date=' you would treat defensive multipowers differently from attack multipowers. That was what I wanted to hear.[/quote']

 

Perhaps the fact you want to hear it is what causes you not to read what I am saying. I am saying that I would restrict a more versatile defensive character (ie Flex Boy) to lower average defenses than a fixed defense character as a campaign maximum. That doesn't mean Flex Boy's restriction would necessarily mean his average defenses are lower than anyone specific PC - it may be that no PC went to the maximum.

 

However, I am also saying I would restrict the flexible attacker (ie the Swiss Army Multipower) to lower DC's than I would permit the attacker with only one choice. That might mean Ogre could have a 75 STR, where the Rainbow Archer's multipower could only include attacks up to 12 DC. If we take an example where a character has atttacks against all defense types and say two or three NND's, maybe they can only have 10 DC's.

 

That's not based on any form of point balancing, but on a tradeoff between flexibility and raw damage (or flexibility and raw defense). I don't see reducing the game to a pure mathematical model as practical or desirable. Maybe that is the true crux of our difference here.

 

As I see it, this is treating attack and defense multipowers "the same" in allowing a character with less flexibility more power in his narrow area of focus. I'm unclear why you would see it differently.

 

Anyone with a reasonably high DCV or flash defense or a targetting sense can beat a Flash attacker. This is because the flash attacker still has to hit before being hit 2-3 times' date=' which is quite plausible if the defender has equal CV to the attacker. Now the people with single attacks are basically SOL if they need 6-8 hits to take out Flex boy and Flex boy needs 2-3 hits to take them out.[/quote']

 

I agree with the flash defense, but if the flash is 12d6, you need more tha 5 Flash Defense. In fact, even an 8d6 1 hex accurate Flash will do quite nicely against someone with up to 5 flash defense, and would deal with the high DCV character. That's another 6 points in the multipower, I suppose.

 

Assuming equal OCV's and DCV's, each character will have a 62.5% chance of hitting the other. The odds of Character #1 hitting twice in a row is 39.0625%. The odds of Character #2 missing twice in a row is 14.0625%. The odds of both occurences in the same combat are 5.493%. As such, at worst, Captain Flash has a 94.5% chance of a win with equal CV's.

 

And I still don't see the numbers from CKC...

 

The example gives flex boy lower total defenses than fixed boy.

 

Yes. Flexible characters should have less raw power than more restricted characters. This is a tradeoff, as noted above.

 

Don't forget foes like Viper 5 teams and Demon Morbanes which generally use energy attacks.

 

Maybe your VIPER 5 teams. Mine, if expecting super-level opposition, generally strive for as wide a mix of attack types as possible. Really, if you're dealing with a high-tech organization, there's no reason to go in any less versatile than you have to. [Anyway, a VIPER agent's martial arts will put paid to a character with 5 PD, but that 40/5 is a clearly extreme example.]

 

Ignoring exotic attacks there are 3 possibilities (assuming Flex boy has 40/10 or some unbalanced defense of that nature):

 

1) Vs someone with only physical attacks, both Fixed and Flex will clobber

 

2) Vs someone with only energy attacks, Fixed gets destroyed and Flex clobbers.

 

3) Vs someone with both attacks, Fixed gets destroyed and Flex is competitive.

 

Sounds like Flex is far better off to me...

 

Again, we're back to repetition. A flexible character will always have an advantage over one who lacks that flexibility. That is why flexible characters should have lower overall averages. But that holds to flexible attackers as well, as many or most have exotic or NND attacks which can get by those high PD and ED characters, multiple defense types to frustrate characters with one high fixed defense, or force those with flexible defenses to allocate them evenly.

 

No question being flexible is advantageous. And multipowers, as they have evolved, are used principally to obtain access to that flexibility in the area of attacks at a low cost.

 

It's not an "occasional" easy win just from your research.

 

A significant advantage in 25% of one on one scenarios is, to me, balanced off by having a somewhat less significant disadvantage in 75% of one on one scenarios and virtually all team scenarios. Another area where we clearly appear to differ. This also assumes purely random encounters. If Flex Boy is attacked by Ogre in my game, there will be a reason for it. That reason could be a lot of things, as set out above. It won't be because I wanted a serious challenging fight, but my random roll picked Ogre off the Random One on One Villain Chart.

 

Depends on the situation. Hunteds would certainly be designed with the PCs in mind and so would master villains. For rank and file villains' date=' I would certainly want the ability to throw a good selection of villains. I wouldn't want to rule out entire common archetypes because the PC has a defensive multipower.[/quote']

 

Nor would I. However, I think 2/3 to 3/4 of published villains to choose from is quite adequate, and that matching Flex Boy against opponents that will be a reasonable challenge is very much in genre.

 

Funny...when teams split up to deal with multiple threats at a time, not knowing which villain will be at each location, Batman or Hawkeye never seem to come up against Bizarro or Ultron. By sheer coincidence, it's Superman or Thor that end up at those locations.

 

Cap certainly does a lot better than AH would've.

 

Give AH the Super Soldier Serum, the shield and years of combat training and let's see how he does He'll probably be Supreme Hydra!

 

His full Pre only took effect when he revealed himself. In ROTJ' date=' his Pre was VERY obvious.[/quote']

 

I would suggest his full PRE becomes obvious when he uses it in obvious ways. If this were not the case, how was he so successful as a senator in manipulating other people and persuading them to his way of thinking? If high PRE was inherently obvious, how would it benefit con men, femmes fatale and similar characters whose high PRE is used primarily to fuel more subtle interaction skills, not to intimidate people?

 

Extremely violent in the context of a superhero or supervillain means much more than a 4d6 HKA. That may qualify vs agents' date=' but I wouldn't give that bonus unless it's quite apparent that the level of power is significantly higher than the PC's. So 45 Pre, assuming the good soliloquy also applies.[/quote']

 

[aside: where did the topic go? Oh, wait, I see it - it's WAAAAAAYYYYY over there! But this is an interesting discussion anyway]

 

I'd classify a "violent act" less by the number of dice and more by the violence of the action. The magnitude falls under such areas as "clearly more powerful". For example, a 4d6 KA used against Superman does pretty much nothing, so was it really all that violent? Smaching a parked car would seem more violent than that. Blasting a helpless bystander or hostage is even higher on the violence scale, and killing a henchman to make the point that you don't like your decisions questioned also seems very violent.

 

And this only would be applicable if Turtle Man was suprised by the Pre attack' date=' otherwise he can set the mp into Pre.[/quote']

 

Not many characters telegraph their PRE attacks. And I can always exhibit my superpower and carry out a violent action by trying to kill Turtle Man - would you like PRE or defenses?

 

Skills only would be 5 pts according to your example. Since this Pre can also be used for offense and defense at the cost of some defense' date=' the overall value is probably about 8 pts for 10 Pre.[/quote']

 

Gary, I can see you lean to, say, a -1/4 or -1/2 limitation based on the lockout limitation. Let's apply this to attacks.

 

What does an attack lose by being in a Multipower? Obviously, the ability to be used at the same time as other powers in the MP. Let's assume that these are only attacks, the most common form of published multipower. What has the attack lost, then?

 

The only thing I can think of is that you have lost the ability to use it in a Multiple Power Attack. If you disagree, tell me what else has been lost. Now, the limitation "cannot be used in a MPA" is, I believe, a -1/4 limitation, at most. "Spell" from Fantasy Hero removes MPA's and a number of other options. That's a much lower reduction than the savings from slapping those attacks into a Multipower.

 

It's getting very repetitious to keep saying "multipowers reduce costs by far more than the reduction obtained by the limitations which would simulate a multipower". Is it your contention that multipowers should be eliminated, in favour of a series of limitations which would apply (probably at varying costs for different power types) to simulate the Multipower?

 

I think it's pretty much a nobrainer that

 

10 MP

1 u +10 Pre

1 u +5/5 Def

 

is worth far more than just +10 Pre. I don't even know why you were quibbling about it.

 

I'd say it's also a no brainer that 12d6 EB, Cannot MPA, 12d6 Flash, Cannot MPA and 4d6 RKA, cannot MPA, is worth exactly the same as a Multipower of the three powers. The point cost, however, is very different. Is the problem Multipower? Is it your contention that Multipowers should, in fact, be restricted to attack powers, where you clearly feel the discount is fully justified, and not extended to other powers, where you seem to feel the discount is vastly excessive?

 

And I'll say it again. Going desolid in a MP isn't unbalancing because the character can't attack effectively. I've said it multiple times in this thread that nigh invulnerability is unbalancing when the nigh invulnerable person can affect the opponent.

 

And that's why Desolid itself is not unbalanced. It does not addres the Multipower issue, however.

 

Let us assume two characters, Gary. Each has a 60 AP attack power. One buys Desolid, 0 END, and slaps it in a Multipower with his attack for a cost of 12 points. The other buys Desolid, 0 END for 60 points. What benefit has the second character received for his investment of 48 extra points? Alternatively, what drawback does the first character suffer to justify saving 48 points? What value will you give the second character as a limitation on his EB for "cannot use if Desolid" and/or on Desolidification for "cannot use with energy blast"?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Since there was a similar rules question, I tossed the question of the "adjustable" multipower on the rules questions board. I don't think you'll be shocked to hear it was considered legal.

 

However, Steve did surprise me by referring to the new "adjustable" advantage which will be in the upcoming UEP.

[schir1964]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

I've been following this thread and that is why I posted the question.

 

Before 5th Edition came out I proposed the idea of having an Option (Advantage or Adder) that would allow the ratio of Defenses to be changed. Steve rejected it at the time suggesting that it would be too prone to abuse so would not be an option in the 5th Edition Rules. Fair enough.

 

I was pleasantly surprised to see that he has changed his mind about such an option existing. The question for me is what the value of this new Adjustable Advantage will be.

 

Conventional Force Field:

Force Field (20 PD / 20 ED) [Cost: 40 Points] Note: Ratio of defenses is fixed

 

Unconventional Force Field:

Force Field (20 PD / 0 ED) [Cost: 20 Points]

Force Field ( 0 PD / 20 ED) [Cost: 20 Points]

Total Cost: 40 Points Note: Ratio is adjustable but powers are independently usable

 

Without an adjustable advantage we can simulate the concept with a Multipower:

Pool (20 Active Point) [Cost: 20 Points]

Flexible Slot: Force Field (20 PD / 0 ED) [Cost: 4 Points]

Flexible Slot: Force Field ( 0 PD / 20 ED) [Cost: 4 Points]

Total Cost: 28 Points

 

With a Non-Official Custom Limitation: Combined Defenses May Not Exceed Largest Single Defense (-1/4 [or -1/2])

Force Field (20 PD / 0 ED)

Force Field ( 0 ED / 20 ED)

Total Cost: 40 / 1.25 = 32 Points [or 40 / 1.5 = 26 Points]

 

With an Adjustable Advantage (Value Greater Than +0):

Force Field (20 Max PD/ED), Adjustable Advantage (+???) [Cost: +25 Points]

 

These three different builds are nearly identical (as far as game play), but we have three different costs.

 

Multipower: 28 Points

Custom Limitation: 32 Points or 26 Points

Adjustable Advantage: +1/4 [25 Points], +1/2 [30 Points], +1 [40 Points], [+2 60 Points]

 

Which one more closely reflects the utility of the concept?

 

I'm guessing it will be Adjustable Advantage (+1/2).

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Multipower: 28 Points

Custom Limitation: 32 Points or 26 Points

Adjustable Advantage: +1/4 [25 Points], +1/2 [30 Points], +1 [40 Points], [+2 60 Points]

 

Which one more closely reflects the utility of the concept?

 

I'm guessing it will be Adjustable Advantage (+1/2).

 

Interesting analysis. I see this as an advantage (you can shift points around), and not a limitation. I suspect +1/2, based primarily on your analysis, simply because it's very close to the MP cost. It can't be +1 (I could buy a +20/+20 force field for the cost of +20 Adjustable), so that sets a cap. At +1/2, the prices are comparable.

 

I could also see +3/4, on the dual bases that advantage stacking may become an issue, and that you could simply use a Multipower in a game that allowed frameworks, so presumably you need the advantage in a game that doesn't permit them.

 

The bigger question in my mind is whether this is a stacking advantage, and how that will be costed. For example, +1/2 to swap between two defenses, and +1/4 for each additional defense it can swap to, would cost 20 x 2.25 = 45 for a 20 point force field you can allocate between PD, ED, mental, Flash or Power defense. The MP would cost 20 + (4x5) = 40 points.

[Zorak1003]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

As I've seen a few others reply, I not only have no problem with variable defenses in a multipower, it never occurred to me that anyone else would, either. In fact, I just used such a thing as an example of a "versatile spell multipower" - A wizard who knows how to do a forcefield effect might choose to change the balance of PD and ED several ways.