Instant, Constant, Persistent

[Sean Waters]

I’ve been chatting on another thread about this and been derailing massively, so I’ve moved it here for a specific discussion. One thing that really, really bugs me is the build for Regeneration in the current edition of Hero.

The whole thing about using the extra time limitation to allow you to heal every phase is so far beyond astonishing that I can almost overlook it. Well, sort of ignore it in a ‘No. That can’t REALLY be what happened…’ kind of way.

Something that remains above the radar though is the use of persistent in the build, and it is this that I would like to address here.

I don’t think it is a legitimate use of the advantage.

What it does here, or purports to do, is make an instant adjustment power (healing) work as a constant power. Well, a bit better than a constant power, actually – it does not switch off unless consciously switched off.

I think that you need to buy the ‘Continuous’ advantage before you can buy persistent, but the rules are apparently against me, both in the ‘official’ regeneration build, and in the definition of ‘Persistent’ as an advantage at p.257 of 5ER, where it says that the advantage can be applied to an instant or constant power.

Conclusive, one might think. Shut up, Sean.

However, you look at page 100 and you start to think otherwise.

P.100 says that if you make a persistent power non-persistent, it is then a constant power.

So, it had to be a constant power all along, no?

Well, yes. If you take something away from something else, what you have left had to be there all along. I think there is a contradiction in the rules, and that the use of persistent shown in regeneration has to go to remove the inconsistency.

Now there is an argument that I will neither present fully nor denigrate at this time, as it is not my own – you treat different powers differently when it comes to advantages. Attack powers, for instance, need ‘Continuous’ but non-attack powers (or powers targeted on yourself) can make do with ‘Persistent’. I don’t subscribe to that – at least not as far as this goes, but we shall see…

What do you all think?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

This seems quite clear.

 

There are 3 basic categories that all powers fall into:

1. target (self or others)
   
2. cost END duration (instant, constant or uncontrolled)
   
3. 0 End duration (instant, constant or persistent)

If you have a power that is instant and targets others by default and you want to make it constant (It then requires no additional attack rolls to affect a target after the 1st hit) you apply the Continuous Advantage. (Example: Superman's Heat Vision)

 

If you have an power that is constant, costs end and targets self by default and you want to make it persistent you buy the 0 End and Persistent Advantages. (Example: Green Lantern's Force Field)

 

If you have a power that is instant and targets others by default and you want to make it into a self targeting persistent power you apply the Self Only Limitation and the Persistent Advantage. Continuous is unnecessary since it only applies to powers that target others (Example: Painkiller Jane's Regeneration)

 

If you take a power that is constant, 0 End and persistent by default and apply the Costs End Limitation it loses Persistent because 0 End is a prerequisite. It does not however lose its constant quality unless the Instant Limitation is also taken as well. (Example: Hulk gets harder to hurt the angrier he gets. It could be build as Damage Reduction with the Costs Endurance Limitation. Captain America's shield could have a multipower slot built as Armor with the Instant Limitation representing his ability to "Block or Deflect" AOE attacks.)

[schir1964]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

You already know my thoughts on this Sean.

 

I suggested breaking down Continuous to try to make better sense out of its application to various powers but most thought it pointless.

 

One of the things that goes hand in hand with this problem is the incongruity of requiring Invisible Power Effects for endurance costing powers that have been made Persistent to be fully Invisible, yet a single application of Costs Endurance automatically makes a Persistent power Visible.

 

All of this needs to be made more consistent in application instead of having all of these exceptions to the common sense application that one would expect.

 

I'll shut up now.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Further information: In Enchanted items, on page 172, the Paladin's Sacred Sword has a Damage Shield that has 0 END, Continuous, AND Persistant.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Further information: In Enchanted items' date='[/i'] on page 172, the Paladin's Sacred Sword has a Damage Shield that has 0 END, Continuous, AND Persistant.

 

That is because the Continuous Advantage is a prerequisite for the Damage Shield Advantage. It does not make it a prerequisite for the Persistent Advantage as well.

[Frenchman]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Someone may need to pose this question to Steve - I can't imagine it is an oversight since it appears in both editions of the book I have.

The two things I did to try and figure out whats going on is to compare standard regeneration to what it would do if it were continuous, and to what a different power, say Aid, would look like if it was built with Persistent but without continuous. The HD program lets you build a persistent Aid without making it continuous first...

So what does a Persistent Aid do that a normal Aid doesn't? How is it different from one that is Continuous also? Theoretically, the answers for Aid and Healing should be the same. And if you can do it to Aid, then shouldn't you be able to do the same to Drain, or RKA?

It seems that it must be either an error or a loophole/exception to make Regeneration less costly.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Here's what I think it ought to be:

 

CONSTANT (or a power witht he continuous advantage)

 

This allows a power that is instant to keep affecting its target without any further attack roll (an attack roll still has to be made for the power to hit in the first place) or other effort, although powers that are constant or made constant do require maintaining as a zero phase action, and so if the character is unable to do that (for example if the character is stunned or unconscious) then the power turns off.

 

PERSISTENT

 

This allows a power that is constant (either naturally or throught he CONTINUOUS advantage) to be maintained without any conscious thought at all, so even an unconscious character can keep his constant powers going. All normal restrictions on attack powers apply, so, for instance, whilst a CONTINUOUS PERSISTENT fireball would continue to burn if the person who created it was knocked unconscious, it would not continue to damage the target if the target was able to move out away from it, because attack powers require line of sight to cause damage, and an unconscious character cannot maintain line of sight, even with PERSISTENT. Use UNCONTROLLED if this is what you are after.

 

HyperMan mentions the relevance of 'self only' powers.

 

Self only is a limitation (or a natural consequence of most defence powers) that means that a power has no range and can only affect the user, so it affects range and target. That is all it does.

 

It does not remove any of the other restrictions on a power - like the need to take an attack action (i.e. a 1/2 phase action that ends your phase) to maintain your power. Indeed it would be very strange if a limitation did something as useful as removing substantial restrictions on a power's use. Of course anything can be handwaved by the GM but we need to focus on the actual rules here.

 

Persistent, either in my version or the official version, does not remove the need to take an attack action, or to roll to hit.

 

Healing is an action that requires an attack action and a roll to hit, and whilst I can see enormous sense in dispensing witht he actual roll to hit, I can see no indication anywhere that it is rightt o dispense with the 'attack action' requirement.

 

That means that regeneration, as currently built, requires atatck actions every phase to maintain (given that it is built with 'extra time'). I'm sure that is not the intention, but that is what the rules say, even before i egt my re-writes in.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Someone may need to pose this question to Steve - I can't imagine it is an oversight since it appears in both editions of the book I have.

The two things I did to try and figure out whats going on is to compare standard regeneration to what it would do if it were continuous, and to what a different power, say Aid, would look like if it was built with Persistent but without continuous. The HD program lets you build a persistent Aid without making it continuous first...

So what does a Persistent Aid do that a normal Aid doesn't? How is it different from one that is Continuous also? Theoretically, the answers for Aid and Healing should be the same. And if you can do it to Aid, then shouldn't you be able to do the same to Drain, or RKA?

It seems that it must be either an error or a loophole/exception to make Regeneration less costly.

 

Using the rules as they are, and my slant on them, here si how I would build regeneration:

 

1 dice of simplified healing: 10 points (standard effect 1 Body and 3 Stun, or you could dice for it)

 

Decreased Reuse Duration +1 1/2 (enabling you to re-roll every phase, instead of every day)

 

Continuous, 0 END, Persisitent (+1 1/2)

 

Cost: 40 points (which allows you 1 Body per turn and 3 Stun per turn)

 

You can apply Self only and Always On, so the cost is now 20 points.

 

That is really very expensive in a superhero game where Body damage is rare, but is consistent with the rest of the rules, and probably quite reasonable in a Heroic game without some sort of supernatural or superscience healing.

 

As to your other questions, a persistent Aid will not turn off even if you are unconscious, so it keeps Aiding you - although it is likely you would rapidly be at your Aid ceiling, it will, in effect, prevent you from falling below that. Aid and Healing do work quite differently, as healing does not fade. that would be my interpretation anyway.

[JmOz]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

just for the fun of derailing, I think 95% of this problem was mistakinly removing the 4th edition version of Regeneration from the game, while I think Healing was a much needed power, to try to shoehorn regen in it was plain silly

 

Then again I would like to see a major revival of the regen power so that what you are buying is steps down the time chart for body healing instead...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

I would not disagree with either of those ideas.

 

Just to tweak the Regen build I offered above, if (instead of simplified healing) you use straight Body healing, the cost per point si slightly reduced as you fet 3 CP per turn standard effect, or 1 1/2 Body, so the cost PER BODY of regen (built that way) would be 2/3 of 40 points (before limitations) or 27 points, which rolls out to 13 points per point with self only and always on.

 

If we did stick with the current format, it would be nice to see Regen as a 'Power Talent' i.e. costed according to the normal rules, but then offered at a single cost as if it did not have advantages or limtiations already. A gestalt power.

[Comic]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

...

You can apply Self only and Always On, so the cost is now 20 points.

 

I can see the Self only being a substantial disadvantage (in my opinion, worth much more than -1/2), but Always On is a disadvantage worth -1/2 how?

 

Do you count this as a visible power, so the regenerator is always glowing, buzzing and smelling of obvious healing effect, even when not injured? (Like a force field that is visible even when not struck by attacks.) That would be worth -1/2, I believe, but it seems like a somewhat unconventional-appearing character.

 

Are tiny items constantly getting stuck to the regenerator, so every paper cut glues the page into their skin permanently? While hilarious, I'm pretty sure the PD of most characters makes paper cuts unlikely, and the sort of things that can get stuck can just as easily be pulled back out again, since they'll heal. This doesn't rise above a -0 for me.

 

If the healing glues them into shackles and nets, wouldn't that better be defined as vulnerability to entangle?

 

Clearly, as a regenerator, they won't be the sort who need typical medical care, so any medical care they do receive ought to be able to suppress their regeneration as needed for surgery. That' can't be worth more than -0, can it?

 

Is it danger of giving away the character's identity, when they're injured in their SID or while infiltrating, in disguise, or shape-shifted? A bit of concealment and some acting, both of which are Everyman skills, ought to be enough to hide this from everyone except the most specialized set of perceptions among those who somehow fail to notice the otherwise superhuman ways the character deals with attack (high DEF, CV, CON, SPD, REC, Stun, PRE, if they have it breakfall/reduced KB, ...) already. So again, this would seem like a -0 to me.

 

What am I overlooking?

 

(Btw, excellent thread. Thank you for starting it over here.)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

I can see the Self only being a substantial disadvantage (in my opinion, worth much more than -1/2), but Always On is a disadvantage worth -1/2 how?

 

Do you count this as a visible power, so the regenerator is always glowing, buzzing and smelling of obvious healing effect, even when not injured? (Like a force field that is visible even when not struck by attacks.) That would be worth -1/2, I believe, but it seems like a somewhat unconventional-appearing character.

 

Are tiny items constantly getting stuck to the regenerator, so every paper cut glues the page into their skin permanently? While hilarious, I'm pretty sure the PD of most characters makes paper cuts unlikely, and the sort of things that can get stuck can just as easily be pulled back out again, since they'll heal. This doesn't rise above a -0 for me.

 

If the healing glues them into shackles and nets, wouldn't that better be defined as vulnerability to entangle?

 

Clearly, as a regenerator, they won't be the sort who need typical medical care, so any medical care they do receive ought to be able to suppress their regeneration as needed for surgery. That' can't be worth more than -0, can it?

 

Is it danger of giving away the character's identity, when they're injured in their SID or while infiltrating, in disguise, or shape-shifted? A bit of concealment and some acting, both of which are Everyman skills, ought to be enough to hide this from everyone except the most specialized set of perceptions among those who somehow fail to notice the otherwise superhuman ways the character deals with attack (high DEF, CV, CON, SPD, REC, Stun, PRE, if they have it breakfall/reduced KB, ...) already. So again, this would seem like a -0 to me.

 

What am I overlooking?

 

I was thinking about that after I typed it.

 

I can see an 'always on' limitation making the power even more obvious. TECHNICALLY it should be visible all the time, unless consciously switched off, but I'd probably say that it is only really obvious when you are regenerating in most cases. if the power was always on then it is up tot he GM to make the limitation work, but I could see something like flesh constantly changing and reforming, looking for injuries to heal. Perhaps if you are impaled then you heal around whatever it is (requiring even more damage to eb done to free you ), or broken bones set at strange angles almost instantly, requiring re-breaking or some sort of penalty until that is done.

 

All in all, I think that 'always on' should not be generally taken as a limtiation unless the player can come up with a reason why it is going to be a problem, and the GM agrees.

 

Self Only si an interesting one though - I was thinking about that too. For the same limitation you could take 'No range' and be able to regenerate yourself OR others with a touch - much more useful.

 

TECHNICALLY Self Only is a limitation on both Range and Target, although they kind of go hand in hand. I would probably be willing to re-assess the limitation value of 'Self Only' to at least -3/4 and possibly -1. -1 would be nice as it would put my calculations back in order if we DID leave out 'Always On'

 

 

(Btw' date=' excellent thread. Thank you for starting it over here.)[/quote']

 

Thank you. Manic Typist suggested I do so - it does seem like something people hold views on...

[Manic Typist]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

What is an example of a power that is both Continuous and Persistent?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

I'd argue that most defensive powers are both constant and persistent - for example mental defence (or flash defence or pd, ed, armour, etc) are both persistent and constant, because if you apply the non-persistent limitation to any of them they are then constant, so presumably they are both.

 

In fact, if you think about it, take any defence power (well not Force field, obviously...something that does not cost END).

 

If you assume that it is 'just' 0 END persistent, as opposed to '0 END peristent continuous', then taking the persistence away cannot leave the power with a more 'expensive' advantage, can it, if it was not there to begin with? So if you make any persistent defensive power non-persistent (for example with 'costs END') then it SHOULD become instant. That is not what ghappens, so I think such powers have to eb both persistent and constant (continuous).

 

For a power that you 'build', you have to make damage shields continuous, and you can make them persistent too, so they keep damaging anyone who tries to touch you even if you are unconscious. You can always maintain a line of sight to yourself, even if unconscious.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

What I'd like is some rules or guidelines as to what Instant Powers it can apply to and when' date=' or if it's just there because you can put Continuous on an Instant Power to make it effectively Constant. I'll clarify that with Steve Long as well I guess.[/quote']

Well, I did just that, but I did not like the answer:

 

I asked "In the description of the Persistent Advantage, it states an Instant Power may be made Persistent. Under what conditions may Persistent be applied to an Instant Power?"

 

Steve Long answered: "Under whatever conditions the GM allows."

 

So I guess we have an official rule GMs may interpret to mean or do anything really. It is now legal to put Persistent on EB (assuming it's already 0 END) and get Continuous for free... and it is also illegal under the exact same rule. It is also neither at the same time.

 

[archermoo]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Well, I did just that, but I did not like the answer:

 

I asked "In the description of the Persistent Advantage, it states an Instant Power may be made Persistent. Under what conditions may Persistent be applied to an Instant Power?"

 

Steve Long answered: "Under whatever conditions the GM allows."

 

So I guess we have an official rule GMs may interpret to mean or do anything really. It is now legal to put Persistent on EB (assuming it's already 0 END) and get Continuous for free... and it is also illegal under the exact same rule. It is also neither at the same time.

 

 

There is nothing in the text of Persistent that states that it confers the Continuous advantage for free when purchased. I can't off the top of my head come up with any real advantage for buying Persistent for an Energy Blast without first buying Continuous.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

There is nothing in the text of Persistent that states that it confers the Continuous advantage for free when purchased. I can't off the top of my head come up with any real advantage for buying Persistent for an Energy Blast without first buying Continuous.

 

I honestly can't think of any other effect putting Persistent, but not Continuous, on an Instant Power would be, but that's exactly what putting Persistent on an Instant Power would be. Doesn't make any sense to me.

[archermoo]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

I honestly can't think of any other effect putting Persistent' date=' but not Continuous, on an Instant Power would be, but that's exactly what putting Persistent on an Instant Power would be. Doesn't make any sense to me.[/quote']

 

Well, the major function of Continuous is that it allows an Attack Power to continue being used against the current target without having to re-roll to hit.

 

Buying an EB Persistent but not Continuous would mean that the power doesn't normally turn off unless you want it to, but you still need to roll to hit anytime you want to target someone with it. Not very useful. However, with an Instant power that doesn't require an attack roll, the power just stays on.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Well, the major function of Continuous is that it allows an Attack Power to continue being used against the current target without having to re-roll to hit.

 

Buying an EB Persistent but not Continuous would mean that the power doesn't normally turn off unless you want it to, but you still need to roll to hit anytime you want to target someone with it. Not very useful. However, with an Instant power that doesn't require an attack roll, the power just stays on.

 

I don't understand how. I'm not really looking at attack rolls, but Attack Actions (which always take a 1/2 Phase action which ends your Phase, but don't necessarily involve a roll of any kind, such as the Dodge Maneuver, or the use of Healing on oneself). Would Persistent eliminate this need to use an Attack Action in addition to just not turning off? Seems a bit of a leap to me, and nothing in the rules to indicate what can and can't make that leap.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Well, I did just that, but I did not like the answer:

 

I asked "In the description of the Persistent Advantage, it states an Instant Power may be made Persistent. Under what conditions may Persistent be applied to an Instant Power?"

 

Steve Long answered: "Under whatever conditions the GM allows."

 

So I guess we have an official rule GMs may interpret to mean or do anything really. It is now legal to put Persistent on EB (assuming it's already 0 END) and get Continuous for free... and it is also illegal under the exact same rule. It is also neither at the same time.

 

 

What a grievous misinterpretation of the rules.

 

It does not confer any of the benefits of Continuous in any manner.

 

Continuous Attack Power:

-Remains On until turned off or Attacker is knocked out.

-Once an Attack Roll succeeds no further Attack Rolls are required to hit the Target, Damage is automatically dealt until the Power is off.

-No further Actions (Attack Actions or Otherwise) are required to maintain the Power.

-In fact if you want to pay the END Costs for two uses you may Attack a second time with the same Continuous Power thus dealing it twice a Phase.

 

Persistent Attack Power:

-Remains on until turned off by the character.

-Attack Rolls are required every Phase the Attacker wishes to hit something.

-Attack Actions are required every Phase the Attacker whishes to hit something.

 

Taser Boy has a Long Life Taser that may be used constantly and never runs out of juice. He flips the switch and it's on, he merely needs to touch it to someone to discharge the shock.

 

5D6 Energy Blast, NND (being insulated), 0END, Persistent, OAF.

 

Taser Boy gets knocked out, but didn't turn his Taser off. So it sit there sparking on the ground next to his unconscious body. He has no Attack Actions with which to use it, so it does essentially nothing, until Dimwitted Man picks up the Taser by the wrong end and zaps himself - essentially volunteering to get hit by the attack.

 

Best way to build the Taser? probably not. (but then as a Continuous Power he could zap someone, hold it and go to zap someone else or the same person a second time. . .)

Legal way to build the Taser? yes.

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

That is because the Continuous Advantage is a prerequisite for the Damage Shield Advantage. It does not make it a prerequisite for the Persistent Advantage as well.

Hmmm, so it is. Thanks!

 

Reading 5ER, it looks legal to me to slap 0 END and Persistent on an Instant Power.

 

Glancing through the BBB this morning, the wording on Instant, Constant, and Persistent is different. It indicates that an Instant Power can be made Constant, and a Constant power can be made Persistent. No mention of Instant to Persistent, as in 5ER. Maybe that's a factor - the old-timers know that it's I -> C -> P, because that's how it used to be...

 

Does anyone have an Fifth Edition official example writeup taking Instant to Persistent (other than Regeneration, that is, as it's wonky in other ways as well)? The examples in 5ER (Flight, Force Field, and Desolidification) all start with a Continuous Power.

[schir1964]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

I'm not surprised by Steve Long's answer.

 

He is slowly being forced into not giving an "official" answer to rules questions. If he gives one, then it is second guessed by others who claim it doesn't make sense not to mention he must now make some note of it for future reference. If he doesn't give an answer and leaves it to GM discretion, then it leaves everyone in a haze where there are disagreements over something "should" be built or interpreted, but it certainly doesn't require any more effort on his part.

 

Steve had to make decision when he picked up the fumbled ball of Herogames and run with it. He could make the system more consistent but he would have to "break" all the past official builds and possibly alienate the faithful following Herogames had. Or he could keep much of the system as is and try to clarify, expand, and attempt to fix a few obvious glitches it always seem to have.

 

He chose to go with the second route and there is no going back due to the amount of investment in the current version. There would have to be major financial incentive to make any sort of sweeping change at this point, and there currently isn't enough people disgruntled enough with the system to create that financial influence.

 

And to be fair, the current system works "well enough" for "most games" that making sweeping changes is very risky financially.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[ghost-angel]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

Hmmm, so it is. Thanks!

 

Reading 5ER, it looks legal to me to slap 0 END and Persistent on an Instant Power.

 

Glancing through the BBB this morning, the wording on Instant, Constant, and Persistent is different. It indicates that an Instant Power can be made Constant, and a Constant power can be made Persistent. No mention of Instant to Persistent, as in 5ER. Maybe that's a factor - the old-timers know that it's I -> C -> P, because that's how it used to be...

 

But the Advantage itself is extremely vague - considering Persistent in 4E is listed as part of the Reduced Endurance Advantage.

[Comic]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

While you folks are exploring the non-regen questions, I'd like to pursue the regen-oriented ones, too.

 

Assuming No Range is allowed to stack with Self Only for Healing (it makes 3 pts difference in the most expensive of these cases, either way).

 

Case A) Non-constant

 

Healing, 10 AP per 1d6 (3 pts Standard Effect -> 1 Body/3 Stun);

+ Reduced to Zero END +1/2;

+ Persistent +1/2;

+ Reduced Duration 1 Turn, Post 12 Only +1.25;

+ Affects Any One Characteristic Lost +1/4 (to counter Drains/Transforms);

- No Range -1/2;

- Self Only -1/2;

- Delayed Activation 1 Turn, Post 12 Only -1.5;

 

For 35 AP/10 RP, the character will need to spend every attack action for a phase to get 1d6 Healing applied Post-segment 12.

 

At most they will be able to half move or complete one half-phase non-attack actions for twelve seconds.

 

They will lose all benefit of the Turn if their Healing is disrupted at any point during it.

 

They must have an attack action every phase (though they can voluntarily reduce their SPD if this seems likely to decrease attack actions lost) so must remain conscious and not stunned.

 

They will obtain 10d6 Healing in a minute, which can affect any characteristic lost, averaging 35 pts of characteristics, in this 'noncombat' mode.

 

It is obvious to everyone observing this character at all times that they are a regenerator, unless they turn this power off.

 

Having the power turned off has no special perils.

 

Case Constant

 

Healing, 10 AP per 1d6 (3 pts Standard Effect -> 1 Body/3 Stun);

+ Reduced to Zero END +1/2;

+ Persistent +1/2;

+ Constant +1/2;

+ Reduced Duration 1 Turn, Post 12 Only +1.25;

+ Affects Any One Characteristic Lost +1/4 (to counter Drains/Transforms);

- No Range -1/2;

- Self Only -1/2;

- Delayed Activation 1 Turn, Post 12 Only -1.5;

 

For 40 AP/11 RP per 1d6, the character has all the benefits and drawbacks of Case A), except they do not need to be conscious for the Healing to work, only to change what characteristic it applies to.

 

Also, there is the special peril of turning this power off that it may be needed while they are unconscious.. and they cannot turn it on after they have been knocked out.

 

Case C) Nonstop Regeneration

 

Healing, 10 AP per 1d6 (3 pts Standard Effect -> 1 Body/3 Stun);

+ Reduced to Zero END +1/2;

+ Persistent +1/2;

+ Constant +1/2;

+ Invisible Power Effects +1/2;

+ Reduced Duration 1 Turn, Post 12 Only +1.25;

+ Affects Any One Characteristic Lost +1/4 (to counter Drains/Transforms);

- No Range -1/2;

- Self Only -1/2;

- Delayed Activation 1 Turn, Post 12 Only -1.5;

 

For 45 AP/13 RP the character has all the benefits of Case , but it is not obvious to most observers. This power can be left on all the time with no substantial intrinsic drawbacks.

 

Case D) Self-Regulating Regeneration

 

Healing, 10 AP per 1d6 (3 pts Standard Effect -> 1 Body/3 Stun);

+ Reduced to Zero END +1/2;

+ Persistent +1/2;

+ Constant +1/2;

+ Invisible Power Effects +1/2;

+ Reduced Duration 1 Turn, Post 12 Only +1.25;

- No Range -1/2;

- Self Only -1/2;

- Delayed Activation 1 Turn, Post 12 Only -1.5;

 

and

 

Naked Advantage:

 

+ Affects Any One Characteristic Lost +1/4 (to counter Drains/Transforms); Trigger on Advantage to Change to Worst Damaged Characteristic Once all Body is Healed, Automatically Resets +1.

 

For (42 + 4 AP)/13 RP (same net RP as Case C, usually) you have Regeneration that will automatically heal the character so long as they are not attacking, of whatever loss their characteristics have suffered.

 

Case E) Combat Regeneration

 

Add the Uncontrolled Continuous advantage to the above, to allow full healing rate even during combat. This comes out at 60 AP/17 RP per 1d6 for Nonstop -- or (57 + 4)/17 RP for Self-Regulating -- and thus hits the 60 AP cap many games have.

 

Case F) Fast Combat Regeneration

 

You can drop more points into the duration advantage for +1/4 further -- hitting the 60 AP level for Self-Regulating Combat Regeneration -- but you'll have to drop the extra duration limitation to -1/4 at most, and I'm uncertain of the legality of taking refresh rate below 1 Turn. If you do go this way, for (60 AP + 4 AP)/28 RP you regain 1d6 Healing/Phase, conscious or not, which is pretty potent.

 

Other Cases - Regrowing Limbs and Resurrection

 

In a multipower, elemental control or VPP, for a few more points the character can get Regrow Limbs, only slower. They'd have to have Resurrection in an EC or on a stand-alone Healing, since I believe Adders can't be Naked advantages. Still, if you need to be Resurrected more than once a day, you're likely doing something wrong.

 

Do I have the rules right? The math right? Is this how you'd build your regenerations?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Instant, Constant, Persistent

 

I'm not surprised by Steve Long's answer.

 

He is slowly being forced into not giving an "official" answer to rules questions. If he gives one, then it is second guessed by others who claim it doesn't make sense not to mention he must now make some note of it for future reference. If he doesn't give an answer and leaves it to GM discretion, then it leaves everyone in a haze where there are disagreements over something "should" be built or interpreted, but it certainly doesn't require any more effort on his part.

 

Steve had to make decision when he picked up the fumbled ball of Herogames and run with it. He could make the system more consistent but he would have to "break" all the past official builds and possibly alienate the faithful following Herogames had. Or he could keep much of the system as is and try to clarify, expand, and attempt to fix a few obvious glitches it always seem to have.

 

He chose to go with the second route and there is no going back due to the amount of investment in the current version. There would have to be major financial incentive to make any sort of sweeping change at this point, and there currently isn't enough people disgruntled enough with the system to create that financial influence.

 

And to be fair, the current system works "well enough" for "most games" that making sweeping changes is very risky financially.

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Nicely put. I think Steve does a difficult job very well.