New Advangage: Seeking

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Forget the to-hit bonus; it's relatively inexpensive to guarantee hits with AoE (Accurate) and NRM. The huge, unbalancing factor in fire-and-forget is that you benefit from additional attack actions. You could easily launch one of these for each enemy and then go have a sandwich while the opposition frantically dodges every turn ad infinitum.

 

If you want extra independent attacks (or any other kind of autonomous actions), buy a Summon or Duplication. Otherwise, you'll have to settle for directed homing attacks as a special effect of accuracy and Indirect.

 

Unless you build the more expensive version, with indirect et al, all you need to do to avoid one of these is get out of line of sight. Unless you are playing in desert or tundra that should be pretty easy.

[Oruncrest]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Forget the to-hit bonus; it's relatively inexpensive to guarantee hits with AoE (Accurate) and NRM. The huge, unbalancing factor in fire-and-forget is that you benefit from additional attack actions. You could easily launch one of these for each enemy and then go have a sandwich while the opposition frantically dodges every turn ad infinitum.

 

If you want extra independent attacks (or any other kind of autonomous actions), buy a Summon or Duplication. Otherwise, you'll have to settle for directed homing attacks as a special effect of accuracy and Indirect.

But Summoning & Duplication are too cheap for the cost.. The cost for summoning an AIM-7 Sparrow Missile (20 DEX, 6 SPD, 40" Flight, & a 5D6 Armor Piercing RKA,see The Ultimate Vehicle, pg. 131-132) is 30 Real Points, summon another 64 of those for +30 points and put the whole thing in a 60 point MP. The closest I can come by describing a missile with powers is 365 Active Points, 112 Real. And that;s just for one.

 

I could do The Sinister Sky Shark's Seeking Shark Strike as a Summon for 31 APs, spend another 25 and summon 32 of them a phase to get mideval on a superteam. My earlier writeup had the SSS summoning only one of them at a time (anyone want to venture a guess on what a ×40 Autofire would add to the active & real costs?), and while one of the team's being chased around, the other members are beating the SSS silly.

 

A Fire & Forget attack has quite a few advantages over a regular attack, I agree (the ability to 'swarm' a target is interesting, and multiple attacker bonuses will be your friend). I just don't think that a Summon or a Duplication is a good way to reflect those advantages.

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

But Summoning & Duplication are too cheap for the cost.. The cost for summoning an AIM-7 Sparrow Missile (20 DEX' date=' 6 SPD, 40" Flight, & a 5D6 Armor Piercing RKA,see [i']The Ultimate Vehicle[/i], pg. 131-132) is 30 Real Points, summon another 64 of those for +30 points and put the whole thing in a 60 point MP. The closest I can come by describing a missile with powers is 365 Active Points, 112 Real. And that;s just for one.

 

I could do The Sinister Sky Shark's Seeking Shark Strike as a Summon for 31 APs, spend another 25 and summon 32 of them a phase to get mideval on a superteam. My earlier writeup had the SSS summoning only one of them at a time (anyone want to venture a guess on what a ×40 Autofire would add to the active & real costs?), and while one of the team's being chased around, the other members are beating the SSS silly.

 

A Fire & Forget attack has quite a few advantages over a regular attack, I agree (the ability to 'swarm' a target is interesting, and multiple attacker bonuses will be your friend). I just don't think that a Summon or a Duplication is a good way to reflect those advantages.

 

Complete aside, but part of the reason that summoning attacks is horribly wrong and unbalanced is because it is assumed that, when you summons a creature or being, they will be reasonably balanced creations, so there will be quite a few poiints spent ont hem that you will not be taking advantage of. Summoning, for instance, a missile, just results in a payload and a propulsion system, with bare minimum stats and extraneous abilities, so it is very efficient, point wise, but also very unbalanced, even if you do take into consideration the phase a summoned missile spends being 'stunned'

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

I think I'm going to stop reading the book, and just play the game the way I think it ought to be.

 

Persistent (and I'm looking at FRED here because I'm not at home) says that the LOS requirement is NOT removed by this advantage IF it is added to a constant power.

 

Does that mean it IS if the power is instant?

[braincraft]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Unless you build the more expensive version' date=' with indirect et al, all you need to do to avoid one of these is get out of line of sight. Unless you are playing in desert or tundra that should be pretty easy.[/quote']

 

So... the same thing you need to do to avoid any other attack?

 

Summon is underpriced if your GM lets you abuse it by buying a naked attack power with no brain. For an actual fire-and-forget, you need to give it a lot more stuff, not to mention the 'slavishly loyal' (+1) advantage.

 

See also: Killershrike's 'Lamplighter Effect' and 'Omega Beams' from the UNTIL Superpowers Database. Neither is especially cheap or effective for the cost.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Forget the to-hit bonus; it's relatively inexpensive to guarantee hits with AoE (Accurate) and NRM. The huge' date=' unbalancing factor in fire-and-forget is that you benefit from additional attack actions. You could easily launch one of these for each enemy and then go have a sandwich while the opposition frantically dodges every turn ad infinitum.[/quote']

 

How do you launch one for each enemy? Let's assume you're facing a four man team of opponents. Is this a Rapid Attack for 4 attacks? Then each one is taking -6 to hit - that will probably take a while. Autofire? That's penalties to hit for the later attacks, anyway. This comes down to a "seeking mechanic". I would suggest that the OCV of the attack is set at the time of firing and dfoes not change thereafter.

 

I think my players might be inclined to all fire on you while you're at half DCV rather than dodge your attack. And since you can Rapid fire four of your attacks, they should be able to as well, to really take advantage of your reduced DCV. Of course, that would mean halving their DCV's, so your seekers will hit that much sooner - there is a tradeoff. I think most groups would agree that each team member taking a single hit in exchange for taking down an opponent would be a reasonable tradeoff. In addition, the first couple of multiple hits will likely take you down, so the other characters can keep full DCV and fire a normal attack against your allies, avoiding the seekers for a while. Note also that their attacks will be normal, not seeking, so they will do higher damage on the same AP.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

The Seeking power would also need NRM to avoid the same -6 OCV' date=' on a basic level. If you want the attack to avoid range modifers as well, that would be a separate advantage. Perhaps for an added +1/4, the Seeking attack could reduce its range penalty by 2 for each iteration as it gradually closes on the target.[/quote']

I'm not suggesting that Seeking automatically includes NRM for no additional cost. I'm just using that as a basis of comparison. One Hex Accurate is not really an automatic hit due to the range mod. 1HA + NRM *is* as close as we get to "automatic hit." And Seeking is essentially the same as "automatic hit" (keep rolling potentially forever until you hit) except that it takes an indeterminate amount of time.

[Oruncrest]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

So... the same thing you need to do to avoid any other attack?

 

Summon is underpriced if your GM lets you abuse it by buying a naked attack power with no brain. For an actual fire-and-forget, you need to give it a lot more stuff, not to mention the 'slavishly loyal' (+1) advantage.

 

Ah, I'd forgotten about that, so I factored that in while I recalculated The Sinister Sky Shark's Seeking Shark Strike. Turns out I can have a 14D6 IPE (I'd bought Invisibility to sight, 1 charge that lasts for 1 extra phase for 5 points) fire & forget physical attack at range with the equivalent of Extra Time (Extra Phase) for 27 real points. Factor in the Slavishly Loyal advantage and it becomes 54 RP, leaving me 5 points to double the number of Shark Strikes. If I kept the damage at the level of my prior writeup (8d6), then I get another 10 points to summon up to 8 'Shark Strikes' at once.

 

Now if I'd bought a 14d6 AF2 IPE (sight) PB, Extra Time (Extra Phase) without wanting it to be 'seeking', it would've cost me 70 points, thus the FnF advantage actually saves me points. That sorta works against what I'd been taught about HERO.

 

See also: Killershrike's 'Lamplighter Effect' and 'Omega Beams' from the UNTIL Superpowers Database. Neither is especially cheap or effective for the cost.

 

I did. Killer Shrike's Lamplighters seem to be especially nasty. For 42 points, not only can the little buggers do 16d6 Energy to their target, but they can slam into said victim for 23D6 physical with a Move Thru at the same time (they have no STR, but they have a 35 DEF Force Wall that surrounds them and can move at 70" and their EB is No Range. Can we say 'Multiple Power Attack' boys and girls? I knew we could.).

 

The Nega Beam in the USPD is a 15D6 RKA, AVLD, Does BODY in an accurate 124" AE Radius and is worth over 1000 points! If I'd bought that without the 'seeking' and just applying the appropriate limitations, it would still cost 225 points, so again, the Summon method of FNF seeking saves me points (74 to be exact) and gives me a devastating attack for a mere pittance.

 

I bow down before Killer Shrike and Steve Long for their 133+ Munchkin-Fu skills. Or is it their ability to make an advantage cost like a limitation. I'm sure it's one of them...

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Single charges are a munchkin approach to making summoned things cheap as they provide a big limitation that will not really affect the summoned (thing) as it won't be there long, certainly not a full day, so it would not be allowed in a game I ran - I'd look at the number of charges (in that kind of build) from the POV of the summoning character - how many missiles can he summo a day? That's how many charges thre are.

 

Moreover, I would not allow you to do more damage with a summoned thing than the campaign limtis allow, and if the summoned thing was, basically, just an attack, then I probably would not allow it at all if it was significantly cheaper than buying an attack 'straight', so whilst this abuse is possible, it ain't happenin' in my town.

 

The GM is the ultimate arbiter of balance, not the point cost.

[swordMaster]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Pardon me, but I was wondering what is SFX?

 

Also, I was wondering if you could make an attack that you have to pay end every turn, make an attack roll every turn, but do not have to make an attack action.

 

The only way without making a new power was to make a summon spell for the Energy Blast, basically, I made the summon spell summon a creature and could attack every round, with the same OCV as my player, and it had a no range energy blast attached to it. So basically my player summoned the Energy attack with no range and it went after the opponant, and when it hit, it de summoned, automatically, I just wish there was a simpler way.

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Sorry - we tend to abbreviate 'special effects' as SFX. In Hero it obviously has a specific connotation - the perceptibel effect of the power is game - the 'look and feel'. At best sfx will have minimal efefcts on actual mechanical application but what I, and others, were suggesting following the original post was that the same effect could be acheived by launching a new attack each phase but defining the look - the sfx - as an attack that hangs around between phases. Obviously it can't DO anything between phases, so has no real mechanical effect, and so can legitimately be defined purely as the sfx of the power, without needing the originally posted 'seeking' advantage.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

I did. Killer Shrike's Lamplighters seem to be especially nasty. For 42 points, not only can the little buggers do 16d6 Energy to their target, but they can slam into said victim for 23D6 physical with a Move Thru at the same time (they have no STR, but they have a 35 DEF Force Wall that surrounds them and can move at 70" and their EB is No Range. Can we say 'Multiple Power Attack' boys and girls? I knew we could.).

 

Actually, you can't perform Move-thrus with a Force Wall. It's explicitly verbotten in the rule book under Force Walls.

 

....

 

I bow down before Killer Shrike and Steve Long for their 133+ Munchkin-Fu skills. Or is it their ability to make an advantage cost like a limitation. I'm sure it's one of them...

 

Hmm...insulting a moderator AND the owner of the boards in one sentence. Smart.

[Oruncrest]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Actually' date=' you can't perform Move-thrus with a Force Wall. It's explicitly verbotten in the rule book under Force Walls.[/quote']

 

Ah. I see. Is that why you used a Force Wall instead of another defense with a -½ limitation: Not vs damage from own Move-Thrus?

 

Hmm...insulting a moderator AND the owner of the boards in one sentence. Smart.

 

No offense was intended, Killer Shrike.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Ah. I see. Is that why you used a Force Wall instead of another defense with a -½ limitation: Not vs damage from own Move-Thrus?

 

 

Not sure what you mean exactly. I used FW because the construct only has 1 STUN and 1 BODY. If an attack doesn't penetrate a FW no STUN or BODY is applied to anything behind it.

 

So basically, attacking the Lamplighters isn't likely to work unless you can beat a very high defense or have a double penetrating attack, or something out of the ordinary.

 

54 3) Energy Form: Force Wall (35 PD/35 ED/20 Mental Defense/20 Power Defense; 2" long and 1" tall), Hardened (+1/4) (346 Active Points); 1 Continuing Charge lasting 1 Minute which Never Recovers (-3), Self Only (-1/2), Restricted Shape (Sphere; -1/4) [1 cc]

 

 

No offense was intended, Killer Shrike.

It didn't read like that to me. Munchkin is pretty widely considered an insult in gaming circles. Ill take you at your word and reverse it to a warning, but please think twice before referring directly to someone as Munchkin in future.

 

Thanks!

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Not sure what you mean exactly. I used FW because the construct only has 1 STUN and 1 BODY. If an attack doesn't penetrate a FW no STUN or BODY is applied to anything behind it.

 

So basically, attacking the Lamplighters isn't likely to work unless you can beat a very high defense or have a double penetrating attack, or something out of the ordinary.

 

54 3) Energy Form: Force Wall (35 PD/35 ED/20 Mental Defense/20 Power Defense; 2" long and 1" tall), Hardened (+1/4) (346 Active Points); 1 Continuing Charge lasting 1 Minute which Never Recovers (-3), Self Only (-1/2), Restricted Shape (Sphere; -1/4) [1 cc]

 

Where I as a GM would have an issue with this is the "1 charge, lasts 1 minute and never recovers". Basically, the creature will get full use of the power for 1 minute, by which time it's summoning has likely ended and the character Summons another one with its own charge. This not very limiting limitation reduces the real cost of the power from 198 points (with -3/4 in limitations) to 73 points [ignoring, for the moment, the fact it is in a framework], which seems quite significant to me - it reduces the base cost of the Summon from 40 to 15.

 

Also, how is the fact the Force Wall can only be a sphere limiting the power when it is already "self only"? If it only protects me, it seems to make no real difference whether it's a sphere, a rhomboid , a trapezoid or whatever other shape.

 

No doubt it works in KS' game, and the charge, at least, would be very limiting if the creature would be around on an ongoing basis, but for a creature that is summoned, sticks around for one combat, and is then never seen again, being able to use its powers only once would seem to make much less difference.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Where I as a GM would have an issue with this is the "1 charge' date=' lasts 1 minute and never recovers". Basically, the creature will get full use of the power for 1 minute, by which time it's summoning has likely ended and the character Summons another one with its own charge. This not very limiting limitation reduces the real cost of the power from 198 points (with -3/4 in limitations) to 73 points [ignoring, for the moment, the fact it is in a framework'], which seems quite significant to me - it reduces the base cost of the Summon from 40 to 15.

 

Also, how is the fact the Force Wall can only be a sphere limiting the power when it is already "self only"? If it only protects me, it seems to make no real difference whether it's a sphere, a rhomboid , a trapezoid or whatever other shape.

 

{shrugs} Self Only and Limited Shape are two separate lims which this qualifies for. The original version was in a Multipower anyway, so it hardly mattered. If you prefer to think in terms of it accomplishing a similar thing in this case, then nothing prevents you from removing one or the other if you plan to utilize it in your campaign.

 

No doubt it works in KS' game, and the charge, at least, would be very limiting if the creature would be around on an ongoing basis, but for a creature that is summoned, sticks around for one combat, and is then never seen again, being able to use its powers only once would seem to make much less difference.

 

Its write up served its purpose at the time, and yes it did work in the campaign at the time in the high powered Millennial Men campaign. This ability was on OddHat's character Legend, and he used the ability on occasion; you can ask for his thoughts on it if you like.

 

That aside, like all the material on my site I'm sharing the Lamplighters write up with the community to use or not use as they like. If you like it, good, welcome to it. If you don't like it, good, do it however you see fit.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

{shrugs} Self Only and Limited Shape are two separate lims which this qualifies for. The original version was in a Multipower anyway' date=' so it hardly mattered. If you prefer to think in terms of it accomplishing a similar thing in this case, then nothing prevents you from removing one or the other if you plan to utilize it in your campaign.[/quote']

 

For my own curiosity, did the "only sperical" limitation ever impair the Lamplighter? If so, how? I suppose the sphere (rather than a skintight force wall over the being itself) would increase the space it needed in order to pas through or maneuver, which could be an issue. After all, it's only -1/4, and the space issue is likely to be at least as frequent as an intense magnetic field.

 

Another point of curiosity: were the Lamplighters specifically created for the Summon, or were they a previously written up being which the character had the ability to summon? It seems like overkill to require existing creature writeups to be revised if the creatures are Summoned to address items that may not be as much of an issue for a Summoned creature as one occuring "in the wild".

[Killer Shrike]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

For my own curiosity' date=' did the "only sperical" limitation ever impair the Lamplighter? If so, how? I suppose the sphere (rather than a skintight force wall over the being itself) would increase the space it needed in order to pas through or maneuver, which could be an issue. After all, it's only -1/4, and the space issue is likely to be at least as frequent as an intense magnetic field.[/quote']

 

This was one of the last abilities Legend gained, so it didn't see a ton of use -- a couple of encounters IIRC and they were both outdoors. In those encounters, nothing in particular came up to counteract them. However, in theory the Sphere Only lim does cause the Lamplighters to need about a hex of space to move around unimpeded even though visually they look smaller than that, which effectively prevents them from moving thru small spaces (they must move by the most direct means possible for them to close with their target, which doesn't mean a straight line if there are things in the way).

 

 

Another point of curiosity: were the Lamplighters specifically created for the Summon, or were they a previously written up being which the character had the ability to summon? It seems like overkill to require existing creature writeups to be revised if the creatures are Summoned to address items that may not be as much of an issue for a Summoned creature as one occuring "in the wild".

 

The writeups were made for the power, not the other way around. Conceptually the are similar to will o the wisps or witch lights, made from pieces of Legend's essence. He would manifest them at great effort, and they would course out to seek out their target, lighting the way for any who cared to follow them (and can keep up).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

This was one of the last abilities Legend gained' date=' so it didn't see a ton of use -- a couple of encounters IIRC and they were both outdoors. In those encounters, nothing in particular came up to counteract them. However, in theory the Sphere Only lim does cause the Lamplighters to need about a hex of space to move around unimpeded even though visually they look smaller than that, which effectively prevents them from moving thru small spaces (they must move by the most direct means possible for them to close with their target, which doesn't mean a straight line if there are things in the way).[/quote']

 

That extra lack of maneuverability seems worth a -1/4 limitation to me. It certainly goes beyond the inability to protect anyone else that "Self only" entails. The fact that it never came up attributes to the power only being used a few times. As well, the character might well make the decision not to Summon when the limitation would have an impact, where he would have used it without such a limitation, which still limits use of the power.

 

Scanning the power again, it's missing "no range", a larger limitation which is allowed to stack with Self Only (ie if you just had No Range, you could still protect others).

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Advangage: Seeking

 

Half of my builds are dodgy in the extreme if taken out of context, but then they are usually built for specific situations (I'm talking about opponents and villains here) so I don't really care if they are mega-nasty - the players will always have a way of defeating them.

 

I personally would not generally allow charge limitations - especially continuing charge limitations - on summoned creatures, on the simple basis that they are not actually limiting them and so the limitation (even if present) should not reduce the cost. In fact there are an awful lot of limitations I would not allow on summoned creatures - any kind of non-accessable focus, for instance. However, that has to be down to situations, and it is not wrong by the rules to do that.

 

I don't think that criticising other pople's builds is necessarily helpful unless you are playing in a game with them, because it is only then it is really going to affect you. Also, for September at least, I'll not hear a word said againt Steve Long. Note the sig, Oruncrest.

 

However, you are welcome to call me a munchkin whenever you like. Or anything else for that matter