Rules to ignore, or replace

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

You bring up good points, but powers are typically staged to be more expensive based on how much more effective and how much utility they have. With this change you'd have a flat cost for Missile Deflection and the chance to succeed would be the primary change to cost for it's power.

 

That works out OK and I wouldn't throw a fit if it was changed, but my primary objection have to consider active cost in all this.

 

Let's say someone has a Multipower for their martial arts abilities, one of the slots being Missile Deflection. If you put a flat cost on the power, then you'd have to have a Multipower at least of that power, even if he put a hefty limitation on it to reduce the power to only work on arrows, the power still requires that active cost to use. Same deal with power pools.

 

This is the case for any abilities with limitations placed in these frameworks. We could argue that Desolid, for example, should also be on a sliding scale for various limited versions, or that a Hand Attack should cost 3 points per DC, rather than being 5 points per DC and then limited (to pick a common issue in an older edition) so the limitations have more meaning in a framework.

 

And when you look at limitations' date=' what would the base cost for Missile Deflection be? The present max of 20? How much of a limitation would you allow for someone who can only deflect thrown objects - would it be enough to get it down to the present cost of 5? Most GMs would laugh if a character said his ability to only deflect thrown objects is worth a -3 limitation, but that's what it would take. Yet is it worth more than 5 points to deflect a spear?[/quote']

 

I'd go with the present 20 points. This issue is one of "limitation values", and I think we're often too stingy in that regard. The system "cap" of -2 encourages this thinking. How common are spears and other thrown objects in a typical Supers game? Certainly not 25% of ranged attacks, yet even a -3 limitation, or 5 point cost, reduces the cost by only 75%. In a typical Fantasy game, perhaps the 5 point level is priced appropriately compared to 20 points for all ranged attacks, but even there what percentage of ranged attacks are thrown objects? 25% is probably still high.

 

This is an issue for other abilities as well. The rule of thumb for defenses "only vs 1 SFX" is a -1/2 limitation, so +20 ED costs the same as +30 ED only vs fire. I can't think of too many games where

+20 ED would not be superior value.

 

In other words' date=' if the cost levels are problematic for your game, consider the power to be a 20 active cost power with appropriate limitations to narrow what you're able to deflect. Say you want to deflect only bullets, that costs 15, you got the 20 point power with a limitation to make it cost 5 points less.[/quote']

 

If it's fair that deflecting thrown objects, arrows and bullets for 15 points, and it's fair that 20 points bumps up the deflection to all ranged attacks, would you allow a character to deflect all ranged attacks except thrown objects, arrows and bullets for a cost of 5 points? If not, then the pricing appears not to be accurate.

[Mentor]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

What if I define my RKA as a rock thrown at the speed of light' date=' or a bullet fired at the speed of light? The lower level Deflections still apply. I'd agree that changing the power so it is not defined by SFX would be appropriate. 20 points to deflect all missiles, with "nothing faster than a thrown object" being a limitation defined by the campaign frequency of missiles that can, or can't, be deflected would be just as workable.[/quote']

 

I can see the point that the SFX definitions are not all consistent. What difference would it make in the cost or damage of the EB to define the SFX so? The rule would still give cost advantage for thrown object buy but would the power be bought based on the liklihood of such an attack?

 

The concept and SFX of the character rather than the power itself should be the deciding factor in this (and pretty much every) case. A Martial Artist who is basically an enhanced human would likely justify thrown stuff, arrows and possibly even bullets, but I don't see faster than that. A mutated Speedster or Energy Projector could more easily justify higher speed weapons. SFX is mutable that way.

 

YMMV.

[archermoo]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I can see the point that the SFX definitions are not all consistent. What difference would it make in the cost or damage of the EB to define the SFX so? The rule would still give cost advantage for thrown object buy but would the power be bought based on the liklihood of such an attack?

 

The concept and SFX of the character rather than the power itself should be the deciding factor in this (and pretty much every) case. A Martial Artist who is basically an enhanced human would likely justify thrown stuff, arrows and possibly even bullets, but I don't see faster than that. A mutated Speedster or Energy Projector could more easily justify higher speed weapons. SFX is mutable that way.

 

YMMV.

 

UEP has a WONDERFUL rewrite of Missile Deflection, that I think pretty much takes care of this kind of issue. Base cost for just straight Missile Deflection, minuses to the OCV of the MD based on the Active Points of the attack being deflected, and Limitations for only being able to deflect certain types of attacks. Overall very well done, IMNSHO.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I can see the point that the SFX definitions are not all consistent. What difference would it make in the cost or damage of the EB to define the SFX so? The rule would still give cost advantage for thrown object buy but would the power be bought based on the liklihood of such an attack?

 

The concept and SFX of the character rather than the power itself should be the deciding factor in this (and pretty much every) case. A Martial Artist who is basically an enhanced human would likely justify thrown stuff, arrows and possibly even bullets, but I don't see faster than that. A mutated Speedster or Energy Projector could more easily justify higher speed weapons. SFX is mutable that way.

 

So the human MA with 35 DEX and 8 SPD should not be able to deflect (dodge out of the way) of a higher speed weapon, but the mutant EP with DEX 12 and SPD 3 should be able to?

 

If half your opponents can deflect your EB, but only 1 in 20 can deflect your teammate's EB, is it fair that you both paid the same for your EB's?

 

Take that one step further - if your AoE attack can be deflected, you get a limitation. Your teammate, whose AoE attack cannot be deflected, pays more for this added versatility.

 

To me, the issue with Missile Deflection is that it ignores a core Hero precept - that mechanics and special effects are separate. That alone carries significant weight, in my view, for the argument it should be changed.

[archermoo]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

To me, the issue with Missile Deflection is that it ignores a core Hero precept - that mechanics and special effects are separate. That alone carries significant weight, in my view, for the argument it should be changed.

 

Which is actually the main reason given in UEP for the rewrite of it there.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I think you need to include the possibility of sfx, even if he core mechanic eschews them:

 

Someone who has a shield of mirrors may be able to deflect laser beams without being able to deflect anything else.

 

You can do this with limtiations, of course, and that may be the best way.

 

Of course, until we replace PD and ED with DEF, we will never be entirely free of mechanic/sfx entanglement

[CTaylor]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I agree overall that the "only vs x special effect" limitation standard in the new edition of -1/2 is too limiting, I tend to make it -1 or more in my games. I tend to look at it in terms of how often you're likely to run into it; even in a game with a lot of fire magic, you'll still be facing guys without fire attacks most of the time.

 

This is the case for any abilities with limitations placed in these frameworks. We could argue that Desolid, for example, should also be on a sliding scale for various limited versions, or that a Hand Attack should cost 3 points per DC, rather than being 5 points per DC and then limited (to pick a common issue in an older edition) so the limitations have more meaning in a framework

 

True, but Hand to Hand attacks have an absolute power: you're actually doing 1D6 more regardless of the limitations on the power. With missile deflection, you're losing real power by not being able to deflect most of the attacks in the game. That's why the active cost for HTA is reasonable at 5 points per D6 but 20 active points to only deflect a spear is a pretty lousy deal.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I think it is simply another area where the power terminology is getting in the way of the mechanics behind it.

Sort of. I think rather it was an attempt to fit a square peg (shape) into a round hole (sense groups). The game already had a mechanic for senses and sense groups. The game needed a mechanic for shape shifting. The two aren't really the same. It's one thing to use terminology to mean something more specific, but in this case, the terminology is used to refer to something completely different from what the word actually means.

 

IMO, sense groups should be dropped entirely from Shape Shift. If you want to fool someone's senses, but Images or Invisibility. Shape Shift should be about actually changing shape.

[JmOz]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

Sort of. I think rather it was an attempt to fit a square peg (shape) into a round hole (sense groups). The game already had a mechanic for senses and sense groups. The game needed a mechanic for shape shifting. The two aren't really the same. It's one thing to use terminology to mean something more specific, but in this case, the terminology is used to refer to something completely different from what the word actually means.

 

IMO, sense groups should be dropped entirely from Shape Shift. If you want to fool someone's senses, but Images or Invisibility. Shape Shift should be about actually changing shape.

 

respectfully disagree, we need to step back from deciding on a f/x based on a mechanic IMO

 

I do not mind the sense link to shapeshift (costing is off IMO but that is a different issue), however some of the rulings have muddied the water for me

 

Let's take Shapeshift to sight without to touch, reasonable F/X's IMO

 

*Holigraphic disguise (if you touch you feel the real person)

 

* Malible skin (The skin does not "feel" right, but is really there)

 

* shapeshifter in traning, similar to malible skin this shapeshifter is still working on textures

 

* Rubber mask

 

* Make up

 

etc...

 

see the problem is some of Steve's ruling have made it so only some kind of "you feel the real person" opposed to "It does not feel right" mentality

[CTaylor]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I think maybe a compromise fix for shape shift would work: cut the sense based cost down considerably and reintroduce the complexity of change rules from BBB. So like 5 for a sense group (targeting) 3 for a sense group (non targeting) and 2 for a single sense, plus 5 for simple, 10 for complex and 15 for any, in addition to number of shapes. I think that would fit better what people have in mind, maybe?

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

Sort of. I think rather it was an attempt to fit a square peg (shape) into a round hole (sense groups). The game already had a mechanic for senses and sense groups. The game needed a mechanic for shape shifting. The two aren't really the same. It's one thing to use terminology to mean something more specific, but in this case, the terminology is used to refer to something completely different from what the word actually means.

 

IMO, sense groups should be dropped entirely from Shape Shift. If you want to fool someone's senses, but Images or Invisibility. Shape Shift should be about actually changing shape.

 

I actually like the thought processes behinfd the current shapeshift mechanic. It is out senses that define what something is. If we want to change our shape then we must change our existence as it appears to other people's senses. Yuou might be able to fool someone's touch, or their sense of smell, or what they see using images but you actually change what they sense using shapeshift - there is no fooling going on, you are actually changing into what they sense.

 

The more complete that change is the more senses it will appear to as the shifted object.

 

 

Doc

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I do not mind the sense link to shapeshift (costing is off IMO but that is a different issue)' date=' however some of the rulings have muddied the water for me[/quote']

I overstated my opinion in my last post. I was in a hurry and had somewhere else to be so I didn't make myself fully clear. When you come right down to it, I don't really mind if sense effects are included in Shapeshift. What I should have said is that at its core, Shapeshift needs to be about actually changing shape. It's a useful effect that isn't quite addressed by any other power. Multiform addresses it somewhat, and Stretching does a little bit also, but neither gives the full utility of altering one's shape.

 

Let's take Shapeshift to sight without to touch, reasonable F/X's IMO

 

*Holigraphic disguise (if you touch you feel the real person)

IMO, that's not a Shapeshift at all. That's Images with "Only to cover onesself" (which we can abbreviate as "Self Only"). (Perhaps we should add an "Imitate" adder to Images, to allow one to make exact images of specific people.)

 

* Malible skin (The skin does not "feel" right, but is really there)

Just the skin? That would probably be Images to the Touch group, Self Only. All it would do is allow your skin to change texture: becoming bumpy, smooth, etc.

 

* shapeshifter in traning, similar to malible skin this shapeshifter is still working on textures

It seems to me that malleable skin would *only* allow textures. In order to actually change shape, the malleability needs to go deeper than the skin.

 

* Rubber mask

Disguise skill, Focus. No actual shape change is taking place here.

 

* Make up

Disguise skill, or extra COM with limitations. Again there's no change in shape.

 

Saying that Shapeshift to the Touch group actually changes your shape is a really bad use of the English language. If you actually change your shape, that affects the perception of you to at least four different sense groups: Sight, Touch, Hearing (active or passive sonar), and Radio (radar, assuming it's accurate enough).

 

IMO, Shapeshift should be structured like this:

 

For a base price, you can change your shape into one other shape that you define when you buy the power. If you change into a long, thin snake, you can slither through a drainpipe or between cage bars. Your shape actually changes. Your coloration, skin texture, voice, body odor, etc., all remain the same.

 

For an increased price, you can assume up to four different shapes instead of just one. For an even greater price, you can assume any shape of a group (such as animals). For a yet greater price, you can change your shape into any shape you want. In each of these cases, your shape actually changes and you gain any utility that the new shape would provide, such as fitting though smaller openings, or being comfortable to sit on, or easier to grab onto, etc. Some uses of this might require a use of a separately purchased Power Skill, or even a whole Power, but even without those purchases, Shapeshift should provide a good deal of utility comensurate with its price. And again, none of these increased levels of variety change any other physical characteristics, like skin texture, voice, etc.

 

Just because it's convenient to do so, we can bundle other related changes with this power. For additional adders, any or all of the following could also be changed:

 

* skin coloration (which would include the clothing worn in most genres)

* skin texture (smooth, hairy, rough, leathery, soft, etc.)

* skin temperature

* voice (or other sounds that could be made with the body - change into a cricket shape and you can make a cricket sound by rubbing your legs together)

* smell (body odor, or other odors that might be emitted by the body, such as skunk musk)

* body composition (body changes to wood, metal, stone, plastic, water, etc., and various Detects will register as appropriate).

* maybe other things that I can't think of right now

 

Most of these could be accomplished with Images, but since they're so closely related to the Shapeshift, they can be included here for convenience.

 

And as long as we're including convenient things related to Shapeshift, why not also include adders to change one's size and mass? Such an adder would not actually grant all the benefits of Growth, Shrinking, or Density Increase - you don't get any additional STR or BODY for example.

 

And of course, we can also have the other adders like Imitation, Cellular, and Instant.

[dstarfire]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

Can anyone give me an example of how it would make sense for a hardened defense to stop an indirect attack and not an other wise identical non-hardened defense?

 

A magically intelligent forcewall that can extend tendrils to block projectiles trying to bypass it.

 

A vehicle that is completely encased in armor.

 

Or maybe a structure is built beyond the usual 3 dimensions.

 

Just because YOU can't think of an example where a power/advantage combo makes sense doesn't mean somebody out there won't.

[JmOz]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I overstated my opinion in my last post. I was in a hurry and had somewhere else to be so I didn't make myself fully clear. When you come right down to it, I don't really mind if sense effects are included in Shapeshift. What I should have said is that at its core, Shapeshift needs to be about actually changing shape. It's a useful effect that isn't quite addressed by any other power. Multiform addresses it somewhat, and Stretching does a little bit also, but neither gives the full utility of altering one's shape.

 

 

IMO, that's not a Shapeshift at all. That's Images with "Only to cover onesself" (which we can abbreviate as "Self Only"). (Perhaps we should add an "Imitate" adder to Images, to allow one to make exact images of specific people.)

 

 

Just the skin? That would probably be Images to the Touch group, Self Only. All it would do is allow your skin to change texture: becoming bumpy, smooth, etc.

 

 

It seems to me that malleable skin would *only* allow textures. In order to actually change shape, the malleability needs to go deeper than the skin.

 

 

Disguise skill, Focus. No actual shape change is taking place here.

 

 

Disguise skill, or extra COM with limitations. Again there's no change in shape.

 

Cliped and will post more on the section missing later

 

All respect to you BUT:

 

I think you are letting the power control the F/X, not the other way around

 

If I am making a character who is suppose to be able to pass themself off as someone else I have a few options

 

I can use image, self only. I can use shapeshift, I can use a huge disguise roll, now I decide on the mechanic. The choice of mechanic should be the same if it is a holigram, a actual shifting of matter, or a use of cosmetics. In the end I should be lookiong at the effect I want, and then find the mechanic that works best for that character, at least that is my opinion.

 

If this seems harsh, I appoligise, I have been getting more dedicated to the F/X rules, and keeping things versitile instead of saying "This is the one way to do it" espesialy when it feels that people are saying this is the only way to make that F/X. Not saying you did, just that it is coloring my perceptions

[Mentor]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

So the human MA with 35 DEX and 8 SPD should not be able to deflect (dodge out of the way) of a higher speed weapon, but the mutant EP with DEX 12 and SPD 3 should be able to?

 

If half your opponents can deflect your EB, but only 1 in 20 can deflect your teammate's EB, is it fair that you both paid the same for your EB's?

 

Take that one step further - if your AoE attack can be deflected, you get a limitation. Your teammate, whose AoE attack cannot be deflected, pays more for this added versatility.

 

To me, the issue with Missile Deflection is that it ignores a core Hero precept - that mechanics and special effects are separate. That alone carries significant weight, in my view, for the argument it should be changed.

Obviously, the specifics of the construction and characteristics will influence the SFX definitions. Fairness in builds should be taken into account but I have seen campaigns where the players went way overboard.

 

I am adamant that the determination of how PC is built should take nearly no notice of how much or how little another PC paid to do their thing. Almost nothing can more ruin a campaign than the players judging their character based on envy over how much perceived value they are getting compared to another, assuming both characters are effective, rather than role playing their own PC with flaws and weaknesses as well as advantages. This applies to some damage caps, characteristic caps or any other measures of "fairness" based around any sort of "he got a bigger piece of cake" concerns. I realize that you are not coming from that approach, but that is an unfortunate "worst case" I have run into. I am pretty hard core on the "just worry about your character not hers" stance.

 

I generally agree with the mechanics/SFX separation precept but honestly don't see how Missile Deflection is broken in practice eben if it does not adhere to the cost structure philosophy.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I think you are letting the power control the F/X' date=' not the other way around[/quote']

And to me, I don't think I'm talking about F/X at all. I'm talking about a specific utility that I want, and a power that gives that specific utility.

 

If I am making a character who is suppose to be able to pass themself off as someone else I have a few options

Yes, you do, but in this case, since you aren't really changing your shape, Shapeshift may not be the best choice. If you want to disguise yourself as a person with a missing limb, or a very different body type, or a not-quite-human alien, then yes, Shapeshift might be the way to go.

 

The choice of mechanic should be the same if it is a holigram, a actual shifting of matter, or a use of cosmetics.

In the specific instance you site, I would agree, but there are many shape-changing abilities which would not be the same under all these mechanics. If you want to change into a snake and slither between bars, Images, Self Only, doesn't let you do that. A hologram of a snake projected over you will not let you escape a cage.

 

In the end I should be lookiong at the effect I want, and then find the mechanic that works best for that character, at least that is my opinion.

We are in complete agreement on this.

[GMumford]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

A magically intelligent forcewall that can extend tendrils to block projectiles trying to bypass it.

 

A vehicle that is completely encased in armor.

 

Or maybe a structure is built beyond the usual 3 dimensions.

 

Just because YOU can't think of an example where a power/advantage combo makes sense doesn't mean somebody out there won't.

 

Let's say a brick wall is hardened by default. Does it make sense for magic tendrils to reach out of every brick wall to stop my boomerang?

 

If you are inside a vehicle (windows rolled up, and the top up if it's a convertable) it should protect you from my boomerang whether it's hardened or not.

 

Ok, for powers designed with Indirect as limited Desolid, hardened defences stoping them makes sense. But how do you define throwing a ball over a hardened Force Wall (that does not have sfx that would include magic tendrils), bouncing it off a wall on the other side, and hitting your opponent? Do I buy a million levels of Indirect to represent real world physics?

 

And, on a separate note, if I Shapeshift, with Mental Sense only, into a chair, do I look like a human twisted into the shape of a chair?

[SteveZilla]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

Oh you are right about the PER roll difference between Images and Shapeshift/Invisibility' date=' but I mostly don't see why there shouldn't be some kind of PER roll for the latter two. Invisibility has the "fringe" effect to represent imperfect vanishing, but why not just build it with Images? Why not have some kind of advantage or adder to Images to eliminate the PER roll if you want effect to be perfect? Maybe this is just my own little hang-up that things aren't more streamlined. [/quote']

 

IMO images doesn't have a way to "buy off" the PER roll like Invisibility has it's way of buying off it's fringe because Images affects things *outside* the character as opposed to invisibility affecting just the character. A PER Roll buyoff for Images would make obsolete the PER Roll penalty purchases. Why buy -20 to the PER Roll when you can make the Image *impossible* to see though, no matter how complex they are?

 

Consider also that you can't do a Cosmetic Transform vs. yourself or Shapeshift vs. others. But Transform doesn't require you to buy it vs. different senses. The way the two powers are built is completely different even though the effect is essentially the same. Okay' date=' well the story-line effect is the same even if from a gaming standpoint one power is really an attack while the other isn't.[/quote']

 

The restriction on using Transform on yourself or to change the inanimate to animate is a game balance rule exactly the same as the one on TK not being able to use it on yourself. It is meant to limit "too much utility for too little cost" concepts/builds.

 

As for the couch' date=' I don't think Stretching is what I have in mind at all. (Maybe it is and I just haven't read the power description recently enough). I am not saying I want to reach further than my arm would normally go, but rather under a gap that is too small for my arm to fit under. I want to use Shapeshift to flatten my arm so it will fit. Maybe a better example would be I want my shapeshifter to operate an alien device that requires a hand shaped like a bunch of bananas. The device doesn't care what my hand [i']looks[/i] like as long as it is the right shape. Surely that isn't Stretching is it?

 

In both cases (couch and alien device), both 4th ed and 5th ed Shape Shift would be the power used. I don't have my BBB handy to reference how it used to work, but 5th ed allows the character to alter his mass distribution, as well as altering his mass/size by 10%. True, most people would notice visually if someting became 10% bigger or smaller, but I belive that is a necessarry evil for a power that is better (more fully) defined.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

The problem is that a 'wall' (force or otherwise) that does not completely englobe a character, can be 'bypassed' by an indirect attack that (for instance) is a grenade that can be fired in a parabola, over the wall.

 

You harden the wall and suddenly the grenade can not be thrown over it.

 

That makes little sense.

 

I do appreciate that for some combinations of indirect and hardened perfect sense is made, just not that one.

 

It makes sense for some forms of Indirect, and is not applicable for the others (usually the ones it wouldn't make sense for).

 

Indirect levels:

Defined Origin Point, Only Fires Away(+1/4): Hardened would stop the indirectness from bypassing the Force Wall, as it is still a direct-line attack that, while indirect still "passes though" the location of the Force Wall. (Personal nitpick: The usual "bolt from the sky" use should be +1/2 level, as it is coming from a different direction than from the attacker despite the way any potential knockback is "handled". The Indirect Advantage would have a Limitation like "Only Straight Downwards" for that use. Otherwise, using this lowest level of Indirect to circumvent a [Force] wall that is between the target and the attacker is wrong IMO.)

 

Defined Origin Point, Fires In Any Direction(+1/2): Hardened would not stop this attack unless the path from the attacker to the source of the attack crossed the Force Wall, since past that point it is a regular attack originating from some other location and either strikes the Force Wall as a normal attack, or misses it entirely.

 

Any Origin Point, Only Fires Away(+1/2): Hardened would stop this in the same way as it would for the Defined Origin Point, Only Fires Away variety of Indirect.

 

Any Origin Point, Fires In Any Direction(+3/4): Hardened would stop this in the same way as the Defined Origin Point, Fires In Any Direction variety. Meaning it would stop the attack if the Force Wall were between the attacker and the chosen source point of his attack.

 

After all, Stretching is in some respects, Indirect. It allows the character to reach around (or over) walls or obstacles. It makes no sense for Hardening a Force Wall to stop what could normally have been Stretched over/around.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I do think Shapeshift is to expensive for the effects it provides. Or more to the point' date=' it costs too much to make the ability function at the base level people would expect it to perform at.[/quote']

 

Perhaps that's because people in general expect too much from the power for a given cost?

 

IIRC, the old Shape Shift was defined as actually changing one's shape & appearance. Okay, sounds simple enough. However, that definition means that it covers every Sense Group, even all Unusual Senses (Senses that have no Sense Group) -- something no other sense-affecting power can do.

 

The main problem I belive people have with Shape Shift is the real-world idea that if one changes the physical shape of their body (i.e., the Touch Group), they are *bound* to look different as well (the Sight Group). And the perception that unless one changes Touch along with Sight to that of a snake, it isn't a real change.

 

In Game Mechanics, the Sight and Touch Groups are no more "linked" than the Smell/Taste and Hearing Groups.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

And I can see being able to deflect lasers and not bullets' date=' but don't see why one should be more expensive than the other. [/quote']

 

Actually, now that I think about it, you're right on this. In just about all other areas, the chosen F/X of a power makes no difference in any prices (both for the power, and for any defensive power used to counter it). It costs exactly the same for a 2d6 RKA to be a bullet as it does to be a Laser. Why should that simple choice make it cost more to Deflect?

 

IMO it is a holdover from the Real-World effect that the faster something is, the harder it would be to (Missile) Deflect.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I think Armor is too complicated.

 

 

 

 

 

What?!

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

I think Armor is too complicated.

 

 

 

 

 

What?!

 

Not to mention Armor Piercing.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

The main problem I belive people have with Shape Shift is the real-world idea that if one changes the physical shape of their body (i.e.' date=' the Touch Group), they are *bound* to look different as well (the Sight Group). And the perception that unless one changes Touch along with Sight to that of a snake, it isn't a real change.[/quote']

 

I think you may have hit the nail on the head with that. Consider this: here is Plastic Man, who's folded himself in the the shape of a cereal box...

 

 

Now, according to the HERO rules, he has only used Shape Shift vs. Touch, as he's changed his shape, but you can plainly see he's still Plastic Man, so he hasn't used Shape Shift vs. Sight.

 

BUT.

 

Suppose he'd been standing in a doorway, in his human shape, and then folded himself down into this box shape. Our vision is affected, because now the objects that were behind him, some of which were blocked by his body, are not the same items that are blocked now, or they are blocked differently.

 

So using Shape Shift vs. Touch to change his physical shape does in some fashion also interact with our vision, how we see him. And that is, I think, if not the stumbling block, at least a big part of it.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Rules to ignore, or replace

 

So using Shape Shift vs. Touch to change his physical shape does in some fashion also interact with our vision' date=' how we see him. And that is, I think, if not [i']the[/i] stumbling block, at least a big part of it.

 

It is why the name of the power is the stumbling block. Energy blast is used to create all kinds of attack powers that are not energy or blasts. We got over that break in terminology a long time ago. Either we need to swallow the power as it reads or ask Steve to change the name of it....

 

 

 

Doc