Help With Build (1)

[SCUBA Hero]

For a Fantasy Hero game, I want to build a Vorpal Sword (does more damage than normal and cuts through armor with ease). No problem:

 

Vorpal Long Sword: HKA 1 1/2 d6, Armor Piercing (+1/2), Reduced Endurance (+1/2) (50 Active Points); OAF (-1), Independent (-2), STR Minimum (12; -1/2). Total cost: 11 points.

 

 

But now I want a semi-Vorpal Sword (still does more damage, but only sometimes cuts through armor with ease).

 

In game terms, I want to apply an 11- Activation Roll Disadvantage (a -1 Limitation) to the Armor Piercing advantage. How is this properly calculated and written up?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

First off, the Vorpal Blade traditionally severs heads, so it's as easily done as "+8 levels, only to hit the head" and consider every attack a called shot to the head (this was in the old 3e Magic Items; not sure if it's in the new version).

 

As for Activation on the AP, the AP itself was 12.5 AP and [12.5/4.5 =] 3 points real cost. Slap on another -1 limit and it should be [12.5/5.5=] 2 points real cost, so I'd just take 1 point off the cost.

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

Yeah, so perhaps it's an unfortunate name. Consider that I have the game effect that I want and that the name could be improved...

 

On the math, it's a matter of when the rounding occurs...

 

Plus I don't know how to properly write it up (as per the Submissions And Writing Guidelines. And I don't have Hero Designer to check out how it would spit out this build...

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

Yeah, so perhaps it's an unfortunate name. Consider that I have the game effect that I want and that the name could be improved...

 

On the math, it's a matter of when the rounding occurs...

 

Plus I don't know how to properly write it up (as per the Submissions And Writing Guidelines. And I don't have Hero Designer to check out how it would spit out this build...

 

 

I'm sure I may be missing something but so far it seems that separating out the Armor Piercing Advantage with its own Activation Roll Limitation makes the build more expensive than if it had no Activate Roll.

 

8 Butterknife Blade: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1 1/2d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (37 Active Points); Independent (-2), OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2) - END=0

5 Sometimes It Makes Armor Seem Like Butter!: Armor Piercing (+1/2) for up to 37 Active Points of Butterknife Blade, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (27 Active Points); Independent (-2), Activation Roll 11- (-1), OAF (-1), Linked (Butterknife Blade; -1/2) - END=0

 

vs.

 

11 Butterknife Blade 2: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1 1/2d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Armor Piercing (+1/2) (50 Active Points); Independent (-2), OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2) - END=0

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

I'm sure I may be missing something but so far it seems that separating out the Armor Piercing Advantage with its own Activation Roll Limitation makes the build more expensive than if it had no Activate Roll.

 

8 Butterknife Blade: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1 1/2d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (37 Active Points); Independent (-2), OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2) - END=0

5 Sometimes It Makes Armor Seem Like Butter!: Armor Piercing (+1/2) for up to 37 Active Points of Butterknife Blade, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (27 Active Points); Independent (-2), Activation Roll 11- (-1), OAF (-1), Linked (Butterknife Blade; -1/2) - END=0

 

vs.

 

11 Butterknife Blade 2: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1 1/2d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Armor Piercing (+1/2) (50 Active Points); Independent (-2), OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2) - END=0

 

 

This is why I don't use Hero Designer or "official writeps". They sometimes lead to unreasonable results, such as the above.

 

Given the blade with no activation on the AP costs 11 points, and assuming we agree there should be a 1 point savings from the activation roll, the limitation ("only the butternut blade") needed to make that "naked advantage" cost 2 points is enormous.

 

The problem is that Naked Advantage is an inappropriate means of effecting the power, in that it is costed for being able to apply the advantage to a wide array of powers when, in fact, it can only be applied to the specific one it's purchased for.

 

"official" or not, I would build this as:

 

Butterknife Blade:

 

6 Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1 1/2d6 (25 AP), Independent (-2), OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2) - END=0

2 Armor Piercing (+1/2) on KA (12.5 Active Points); Independent (-2), Activation Roll 11- (-1), OAF (-1), Linked (Butterknife Blade; -1/2), - END=0

3 0 END (+1/2) on KA (12.5 Active Points); Independent (-2),, OAF (-1), Linked (Butterknife Blade; -1/2) - END=0

 

That totals the same 11 points due to rounding, but at least isn't charging extra for reduced functionality. However, it also says "wy bother making the AP on an activation roll" from a strictly mechanical sense.

 

Perhaps we should place "STR Min" on the AP as well, which makes the STR min total a bit higher, but also reduces the cost 1 point.

[Oruncrest]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

I'm sure I may be missing something but so far it seems that separating out the Armor Piercing Advantage with its own Activation Roll Limitation makes the build more expensive than if it had no Activate Roll.

 

I think I see why: You applied the advantage to the Active Cost (37 pts.) instead of the Base Cost (25 pts.). It doesn't help that in HERO Designer, Naked Advantages cost END even if the powers that they apply to don't (in this case, 0 END had to be bought for Armor Piercing, even though the power it was 'linked' to was 0 END). It should look like this in HD:

 

8 Butterknife Blade: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1 1/2d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (37 Active Points); Independent (-2), OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2) - END=0

3 Sometimes It Makes Armor Seem Like Butter!: Armor Piercing (+1/2) for up to 25 Active Points of Butterknife Blade, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (18 Active Points); Independent (-2), Activation Roll 11- (-1), OAF (-1), Linked (Butterknife Blade; -1/2), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2) - END=0

[casualplayer]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

SCUB, you know that AP really blows at low DEF levels, right? You're better off just buying Piercing Points up to plate mail level (9 DEF, if I recall correctly) which are Standard Effect damage Only for overcoming armor. They are also a lot easier to apply an Activation Roll to. Mmmmm, piercing points.

 

Or you could just customize an advantage: Occasionally Vorpal. AP is normally +1/2, Act. 11- is -1 so I, if I were the GM, would be OK with you, in this isolated case, going with a +1/4 aggregated advantage.

 

Or you could give the weapon a soul and give it Find Weakness UBO (Others being the wielder) on an 11-. The weapon burns its own SPD to find the weakness and communicates it to the swordsman, through Mind Link or some such.

 

Or you could strip the STR Min off the weapon so that the wielder's full STR gets to add, which will make it cleave through armor quite nicely. The blade is so sharp that blows made with it are effortless, hot knife through butter and such. Bad damage rolls would represent the "AP" not activating.

[Simon]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

I think I see why: You applied the advantage to the Active Cost (37 pts.) instead of the Base Cost (25 pts.). It doesn't help that in HERO Designer' date=' Naked Advantages cost END even if the powers that they apply to don't (in this case, 0 END had to be bought for Armor Piercing, even though the power it was 'linked' to was 0 END). It should look like this in HD:[/quote']

That's because Naked Advantages cost END to use, regardless of the Power they are applied to. The only exception to this is a Naked Advantage of Reduced END.

[Oruncrest]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

...It doesn't help that in HERO Designer' date=' Naked Advantages cost END even if the powers that they apply to don't (in this case, 0 END had to be bought for Armor Piercing, even though the power it was 'linked' to was 0 END)...[/quote']

That's because Naked Advantages cost END to use, regardless of the Power they are applied to. The only exception to this is a Naked Advantage of Reduced END.

 

Hmmm... If I write the 'Naked Advantage as a custom adder, I'll save a point.

 

10 Butterknife Blade: HKA 1 1/2d6 (3d6+1 w/STR) (Armor Peircing against Hit Locations 3-9, 15-18, +6pts.), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (46 Active Points); Independent (-2), OAF (-1), STR Min=12 (-1/2)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

5er p 245 discusses purchasing a naked advantage for a single power being different from the typical naked advantage. This is applied as follows:

 

(a) Buy the power without the naked advantage (AP in this case), so 8 points.

 

( Compute the cost of the power with the added AP advantage, which we have already determined is 11 points.

 

© The difference of 3 points is the base cost of the naked advantage. It costs END and any further advantages or limitations apply to that base cost.

 

(d) So we apply 0 END, making the AP 3 * 1.5 = 4 and apply Act 11-, making the real cost 2 points.

 

Total cost 10 points.

 

Naked Advantage: AP on Butternut Blade, 0 END (+1/2) 4 AP, Act 11- (-1) 2 real points.

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

Hugh Nielson,

 

THANK YOU! for the rules reference and the writeup. That's what I was looking for.

 

Rep coming once I spread it around...

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

SCUB, you know that AP really blows at low DEF levels, right? You're better off just buying Piercing Points up to plate mail level (9 DEF, if I recall correctly) which are Standard Effect damage Only for overcoming armor. They are also a lot easier to apply an Activation Roll to. Mmmmm, piercing points.

 

Or you could just customize an advantage: Occasionally Vorpal. AP is normally +1/2, Act. 11- is -1 so I, if I were the GM, would be OK with you, in this isolated case, going with a +1/4 aggregated advantage.

 

Or you could give the weapon a soul and give it Find Weakness UBO (Others being the wielder) on an 11-. The weapon burns its own SPD to find the weakness and communicates it to the swordsman, through Mind Link or some such.

 

Or you could strip the STR Min off the weapon so that the wielder's full STR gets to add, which will make it cleave through armor quite nicely. The blade is so sharp that blows made with it are effortless, hot knife through butter and such. Bad damage rolls would represent the "AP" not activating.

AARRGGHH!!!!

 

Again, can we assume for the moment that I have the game effect that I want and figure out how to properly build it and write it up???

 

Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the alternate suggestions (Hero gamers are a creative bunch! ), but in this case I'm interested in the concept of how to write up a Limitation on an Advantage; the example is just that - an example to illustrate the idea.

[JmOz]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

That's because Naked Advantages cost END to use' date=' regardless of the Power they are applied to. The only exception to this is a Naked Advantage of Reduced END.[/quote']

 

Umm are you sure about this? It was my understanding (and I could be incorrect or behind the times) that a naked advantage that could only be applied to a single power did not cost endurance if the main power did not normaly cost endurance

 

For instance if I had a naked advantage that only worked with my energy blast with 0 endurance, lets say Armor Piercing with concentration that it would not cost any endurance

 

I admit I could be wrong, but that was my understanding...

[Simon]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

Umm are you sure about this? It was my understanding (and I could be incorrect or behind the times) that a naked advantage that could only be applied to a single power did not cost endurance if the main power did not normaly cost endurance

 

For instance if I had a naked advantage that only worked with my energy blast with 0 endurance, lets say Armor Piercing with concentration that it would not cost any endurance

 

I admit I could be wrong, but that was my understanding...

Positive.

 

5ER 244-245

[JmOz]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

AARRGGHH!!!!

 

Again, can we assume for the moment that I have the game effect that I want and figure out how to properly build it and write it up???

 

Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the alternate suggestions (Hero gamers are a creative bunch! ), but in this case I'm interested in the concept of how to write up a Limitation on an Advantage; the example is just that - an example to illustrate the idea.

 

This is how I think it is suppose to be done

 

Figure out the active point cost of the power with and without the advantage, find the difference, apply the limitation with all other limitations to the advantaged power.

 

Lets say you want EB 10d6, 0 End, OAF

With AP as extra-time (away from book so lets saya th the -1 level)

 

The base power costs 37 points

 

Now the AP would be +25 Points, with a total of -2 of limitations (-1 for extra time, -1 for OAF)

 

For a total of 8 points

 

Written as

 

45 Laser gun: EB 10d6, 0 End, OAF plus Armor Piercing, OAF, Extra Time

[Sean Waters]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

You guys and your naked advantages. Here's how I'd have done it, without looking it up specifically...

 

OK, let us start with the HKA 0 END:

 

37 points

 

Limitations:

 

OAF -1

Independent -2

STR min -1/2

Total -3 1/2

 

Cost so far: 8.22 points. No rounding yet - we haven't finished.

 

Advantages

 

AP +1/2, or another 13 points (because the power has to total 50 AP)

 

Limitations

 

As above -3 1/2

11- Activation -1

Total -4 1/2

 

Additional cost: 2.36

 

Total cost: 10.58 or 11 points.

 

I know that is what it cost before, but:

 

1: It is only a point, and you are doing this for concept, not that one point, surely.

2. It is MY point, not yours, and I'm damned if I'm letting you get away with two lots of rounding down, you point thief, you.

3. It works out at 11 points even if you go with a 38 point sword and a 12 point AP advantage.

 

Can I just say that the reason this is a problem, to my mind, is that you are using a naked advantage. I don't think it is needed - this is a single power, albeit partially limited. Page 282 will explain it all - partially limtied powers applied to advantages. I'm sorry about it costing the same either way. You might get a GM to allow you the double round down, to 10 points, or you could tweak the build a little so the round down works in your favour.

[JmOz]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

Stupid question

 

Is there a difference between Naked advantages and limited advantages?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

I trashed your point analysis for brevity, but it looks right to me.

 

1: It is only a point, and you are doing this for concept, not that one point, surely.

2. It is MY point, not yours, and I'm damned if I'm letting you get away with two lots of rounding down, you point thief, you.

3. It works out at 11 points even if you go with a 38 point sword and a 12 point AP advantage.

 

Can I just say that the reason this is a problem, to my mind, is that you are using a naked advantage. I don't think it is needed - this is a single power, albeit partially limited. Page 282 will explain it all - partially limtied powers applied to advantages. I'm sorry about it costing the same either way. You might get a GM to allow you the double round down, to 10 points, or you could tweak the build a little so the round down works in your favour.

 

I prefer the partially limited power approach.

 

The cost working out to no less is simply because the other limitations have markedly reduced the cost. I see this a lot in fantasy, especially with spells which have massive limitations applied, and also occasionally in multipower slot costs. Unless we want to go to decimal places for point costs, there will be constructs that have more limitations and the same costs.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

Stupid question

 

Is there a difference between Naked advantages and limited advantages?

 

They are on different pages in the book

 

Actually they have quite a lot of difference in practice. The limited advantage approach creates a single power, whereas technically a naked advantage is a seperate power, that you don't have to use with the base power. I wonder if you could buy that linked? Also you don't have to pay for the 0 END one and a half times, so there is a construction difference too.

 

I think Hugh is quite right about the limitations having the effect on rounding and cost that they do. Really though, I'm not sure it is worth sweating over a point, but I suppose it would be elegant if the more limited version cost a little less.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

I think the only way that naked advantages really differ in cost from limited advantages is when reduced END is involved.

 

Here's an example:

 

We want a 2d6 RKA that is 0 END and has Armour Piercing working on an 11- (-1)

 

LIMITED ADVANTAGE:

 

30 points + 1/2 (for 0 END) is 45 points

PLUS the cost of AP is 15 points, halved because of the 11- limitation to 7

Total cost 52 points

 

NAKED ADVANTAGE

 

30 points +1 advantahes (0 END plus AP) = 60 points

30 points +1/2 advantages (0 END) = 45 points

Cost of naked advantage = 15 points

To make NA be 0 END costs 15 + 1/2 or 22 points, to which we apply the 11- limitation for 11 points

Total 45+11 = 56

 

The naked advantage is more expensive BUT you don't HAVE to use it with the base power as it is a seperate special power. In this case a limited advantage would be a far better bet to my mind.

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

I prefer the partially limited power approach.

Nice! I missed this too...

 

Hmm, for the example given, Partially Limited seems better, as the swordbearer shouldn't be able to 'turn off' the sharpness (or, you could argue that he could strike with the flat of the blade, or somesuch... Hero is versatile!)

 

So, doing it as a Partially Limited Power:

 

Semi-Sharp Long Sword: HKA 1 1/2 d6, Armor Piercing (+1/2) Activation (11-; -1), Reduced Endurance (+1/2) (50 Active Points); OAF (-1), Independent (-2), STR Minimum (12; -1/2). Total cost: 10 points.

 

Is that right? (Both points and write-up style.) Would someone with Hero Designer punch this in and post the write-up?

 

Points-wise: 25 Base Points, with a +1/2 Advantage and -4 1/2 Limitations ([25 * (1 + 1/2)] - 25) rounded = 12 / 5.5 = 2, plus 25 Base Points, with a +1/2 Advantage and -3 1/2 Limitations 37 / 4.5 = 8

 

Oh, and note the rounding rules on page 7 of 5ER - you round at each step of the calculation.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Help With Build (1)

 

Nice! I missed this too...

 

Hmm, for the example given, Partially Limited seems better, as the swordbearer shouldn't be able to 'turn off' the sharpness (or, you could argue that he could strike with the flat of the blade, or somesuch... Hero is versatile!)

 

So, doing it as a Partially Limited Power:

 

Semi-Sharp Long Sword: HKA 1 1/2 d6, Armor Piercing (+1/2) Activation (11-; -1), Reduced Endurance (+1/2) (50 Active Points); OAF (-1), Independent (-2), STR Minimum (12; -1/2). Total cost: 10 points.

 

Is that right? (Both points and write-up style.) Would someone with Hero Designer punch this in and post the write-up?

 

Points-wise: 25 Base Points, with a +1/2 Advantage and -4 1/2 Limitations ([25 * (1 + 1/2)] - 25) rounded = 12 / 5.5 = 2, plus 25 Base Points, with a +1/2 Advantage and -3 1/2 Limitations 37 / 4.5 = 8

 

Oh, and note the rounding rules on page 7 of 5ER - you round at each step of the calculation.

 

You are right about the rounding (I'm a notorious skinflint), which gives a slight cost difference, so all is well