Triggered Recovery?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Keep in mind that "Regeneration" is a special/optional form of Healing that is not required to have the Advantage: Decreased Re-use Duration (1 Turn; +1 1/2).

 

Yes and no. First off, Regen predates the Decreased Re-Use Duration, and as such wasn't changed to reflect that when 5er was published.

 

However, Regen has an implicit advantage for circumvention of this rule. 1d6 at standard effect should heal 3 character points. 1 BOD is only 2 character points, so 1 BOD regen is really only 2/3 of 1d6. if you extrapolate back all the advantages and limitations, resetting once per turn has an implicit cost of a +1 advantage.

 

In my view, the "decreased re-use" advantage should have been structured to make 1 turn the same +1 as Regen, and the advantage officially added there. Hopefully, 6e will either do this or use the same +1 1/2 decreased reuse as any other healing with a 1 turn reset.

 

As written, Regen has +1 in advantages and 1.75 in limitations, for a cost of 7.27 per 1d6. With a +2 advantage, 2/3 of 1d6 would cost the same 7.27, leading to my contention there is a built-in +1 advantage. Make the advantage 1.5, and 1 BOD regen costs 8.48 points, not a huge change anyway.

[mmshah]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

30 Slightly quicker Regeneration: Healing 3 BODY, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates, Character does not control activation of personal Trigger; Whenever character is below starting BODY damage.; +3/4), (82 Active Points); Extra Time (Regeneration-Only) 1 Turn (Post-Segment 12) (-1 1/4), Self Only (-1/2) - END=0

 

So its like 3 normal regen, except you dont have wait until PS-12 to heal for which you pay an additional 8 CP seems ok to me.

 

Or Alternatively build:

 

28 Yet another Regeneration but Different!: Healing BODY 1d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates, Character does not control activation of personal Trigger; Whenever character is below starting BODY damage.; +3/4), Decreased Re-use Duration (1 Turn; +1 1/2) (42 Active Points); Self Only (-1/2)

 

[Notes: If the character suffers 3 Body damage on Phase 3 then you roll 1d6, reset and repeat until you roll a 6 and Heal upto 6 AP (3 Body) (rolling is kinda of silly thou since you autoreset and keep going until you Max out) then any further Body damage will not heal until Phase 3 on the following Turn.] - END=0

 

Which functions in a similiar manner. Only thing is you must buy it at the 1/2d6 or 1d6 level minimum. Note that Steve never said Trigger was illegal for Regen just that it doesnt allow you to Regen more then once per Turn. Thus you can still use Trigger to Regen Earlier in the Turn, you just have to wait 1 Turn after it goes off to use it again.

 

The difference between the 2 is that in Slightly quicker Regeneration If you take less then 3 Body in a hit your Regen is used up for the Turn, while in Yet another Regeneration but Different! the Healing could function again until you Healed 3 Body Total.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

I liked your write up of "He Heals Quick" of which the above are variations' date=' but I dont think Always On qualifies given:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55142&highlight=regeneration

 

Also technically "It's like Regeneration but Different!" requires an attack action.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58661&highlight=healing+attack+action

 

But Healing only has Max Effect Limitations, no one use per Turn restriction, thou you have to roll higher each time to add any effect (if not using standard effect) as far as I can tell.

 

I know Steve has mentioned Triggered Healing here:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36735&highlight=triggered+healing

 

So I think "It's like Regeneration but Different! (per wound)" is legal.

 

 

1. Re: Always On
   • This depends a great deal on the type of campaign the character with such an ability is in. The title character from the recently canceled Sci-Fi series "Painkiller Jane" had a regeneration ability which she could consciously turn off. One episode put her in a situation that would have trapped her indefinitely if she did not have the ability to turn it off. I'm sure there are settings where it would almost never hinder the character but in those cases it should still be noted on the build as (-0) Limitation.

[*]Re: requires an attack action

• This one is a little hazier. Steve ruled on a general question regarding Healing which targets others by default. Given that my build fits within all the restrictions of the 'book default Regeneration' AND is more expensive, I doubt any GM would object to its use.

[*]Re: Max Effect Limitations

• Let me refer back to my 3rd example:

27

It's like Regeneration but Different! (per wound)

: Healing BODY 1d6+1 (standard effect: 4 points), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates, Character does not control activation of personal Trigger; Whenever character takes BODY damage.; +3/4), Decreased Re-use Duration (1 Turn; +1 1/2) (55 Active Points); Always On (-1/2), Self Only (-1/2) [Notes: If the character suffers 3 Body damage on Phase 3 and then 1 Body damage on Phase 6 they will not heal the remaining 1 Body from phase 3 until Phase 3 on the following Turn. The healing triggered on Phase 6 will only affect the damage taken that phase.] - END=0

Per the example I included in the notes:

• On Phase 3 the character takes 3 Body (wound 1).
  • He immediately heals 2 Body due to the trigger.
    
  • At the end of the Phase he is STILL down 1 Body due to wound 1.

  [*]On Phase 6 the character takes 1 Body (wound 2).

  • He immediately heals back the 1 Body from wound 2 but is still down 1 Body from wound 1.

  [*]At the end of Phase 12 he gets his normal post phase 12 Recovery of STUN and END but is STILL down 1 Body due to wound 1.

  [*]On Phase 3 of the following Turn he heals back the remaining 1 Body from wound 1.

This form of 'regeneration' might be useful if someone wanted to use a non-defense method to simulate near-immunity to small damage attacks like automatic gunfire but not higher damage attacks like a grenade or heavy sword. The 'regeneration' effect still works but is much slower vs. a single large attack than it is vs. many smaller ones. Of course the bookkeeping the use of this power would require would be a nightmare to most.

[mmshah]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

As I noted before auto-reset triggers can be trouble because they have the potential to be abusive. I think this can be partly remedied by requiring valid Triggers to be specific events rather then conditions. This would prevent autoreset Triggers from auto-retriggering. Examples would include:

 

When knocked unconcious

But Not While unconcious

 

When character takes Body

But Not while character is below starting Body

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

A zero phase action is' date=' according to the rules, a legitimate Trigger action. When something happens (such as you being unconscious, you being struck for damage, or the sun rising) are also legitimate triggers.[/quote']

True, but that doesn't make them equally valid. I was not claiming invalidity based on a lack of adherance to the letter of the rules. I was claiming it based on abusiveness. As any good GM knows, you can build something competely within the rules and still have it be abusively powerful.

 

You seem willing to allow only certain forms, quite restruictive in fact, ...

Which is both my right and duty as a GM. Don't you review your players' builds? Do you accept all of them, no matter how munckiny, as long as they follow the *letter* of the rules?

 

... as legitimate Triggers for recovery, all the while insisting that there are no more issues with triggered REC than a triggered EB.

I have never claimed any such thing, let alone insisted on it.

 

On the one hand, you argue that Trigger applied to REC granting an automatic recovery is fully consistent with the rules, and not allowing such a construct to work in this fashion is an unreasonable interpretation applying an arbitrary exception to the Trigger rules. On the other, you deny many fairly standard uses of Trigger when applied to REC, arbitrarily restricting the ability to apply Trigger to REC. I find that inconsistent.

Huh? I thought you said that there are no "standard uses of Trigger when applied to REC," - that Trigger applied to REC does nothing. I'm the one who is *allowing* Trigger to apply to REC.

 

I'll say this again: Just because I allow X, doesn't mean I must allow Y. No matter how similar X and Y are, if the bottom line is that X is a reasonable level of power for the price, and Y isn't, then I will allow X and not allow Y, as all good GMs would. It might be inconsistent with rules-lawyering, but it's consistent with fairness, which IMO is more important.

 

I can trigger the Regen any number of times in a given segment. For 21 points, I can regenerate 3 BOD each PS 12. For that 20 point construct, I regenerate all my BOD each time I take BOD. Which seems more powerful to you?

Assuming your GM lets you. I wouldn't. Off hand, I can't think of any cases where I'd allow an automatically-resetting Trigger to go off more than once per phase, unless some additional Advantage is applied.

 

And to directly answer your question, I'd say the latter seems more powerful. Much too powerful for 20 points, in fact. That's why I wouldn't allow it.

[Era Scarecrow]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Honestly, unless you are doing a REALLY REALLY super game, standard regen (Note the power in: Ninja Hero - it's only a flesh wound fix), which does 300body in an hour of healing, and doing faster would be kinda insane, almost too powerful.

 

Perhaps what we need is modified speed.

 

1 SPD, Inherent +1/2 (15AP) Limited only to take recoveries when unconscience (-2 1/2) 4pts. (-1 not for battle(attacking), -1 for no skills, -1/2 after unconscience, perhaps uncontrolled instead of the -1/2)

 

i would THINK (i could be wrong) that if you go below -10, one could also modify his 1 original speed using a naked modifier, to make it inherent. Perhaps something along these lines?

 

Era

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Huh? I thought you said that there are no "standard uses of Trigger when applied to REC' date='" - that Trigger applied to REC does nothing. I'm the one who is *allowing* Trigger to apply to REC.[/quote']

 

You're misreading my comment. I intended to comment that you:

 

- view the failure to allow Trigger to create an automatic "take a recovery" action as an arbitrary restriction to the rules.

 

- disallow many standard uses of Trigger, when applied to REC using your interpretation of the rules.

 

How is it any less arbitrary to conclude that Trigger applied to REC does not create a "take a recovery" action (any more than Trigger can create a "haymaker", "brace and set", etc. action) than to conclude that we must restrict the rules for Trigger in order to allow Triggered REC to allow a "take a recovery" action?

 

Would you allow, for example, an automatically resetting Trigger to grant a recovery each time the character is hit? Would you similarly disallow an automatically resetting Trigger that would apply a Healing power of equivalent cost? What if it Triggered teleportation? A retaliatory attack? These are all the same trigger, applied to different abilities. To me, all seem prima facie acceptable except the REC one. The fact that the REC one is overpowered is, to me, evidence that extrapolating a free "take a recovery" action out of Trigger is an inappropriate and unbalanced interpretation of the rules.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Honestly' date=' unless you are doing a REALLY REALLY super game, standard regen (Note the power in: Ninja Hero - it's only a flesh wound fix), which does 300body in an hour of healing, and doing faster would be kinda insane, almost too powerful.[/quote']

 

I think a lot of people want to heal faster than they are injured. 1 BOD Regen does not do this in many games.

 

Perhaps what we need is modified speed.

 

1 SPD' date=' Inherent +1/2 (15AP) Limited only to take recoveries when unconscience (-2 1/2) 4pts. (-1 not for battle(attacking), -1 for no skills, -1/2 after unconscience, perhaps uncontrolled instead of the -1/2)[/quote']

 

Except that once you fall below -10 STUN, you cannot take a recovery anyway. Higher SPD does not increase your recovery rate under those conditions.

 

Inherent just means it can't be drained or suppressed, so it seems to add nothing.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Unless I'm mistaken, a Recovery by its definiton is resting to catch one's breath. So a Recovery is not an action, but an absence of action. I do not see how it is possible to trigger an "absence of action" action. And "Take A Recovery" is on the Action chart not because it is an "Action" that is "Done", but because it is a choice.

 

So to recap my take on this point: You cannot triggger a nonaction, but you can choose nonaction.

 

This is all IMO, and YMMV, etc. etc. etc.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Unless I'm mistaken' date=' a Recovery by its definiton is resting to catch one's breath. So a Recovery is not an action, but an absence of action. I do not see how it is possible to trigger an "absence of action" action. And "Take A Recovery" is on the Action chart not because it is an "Action" that is "Done", but becuase it is a [b']choice[/b].

 

So to recap my take on this point: You cannot triggger a nonaction, but you can choose nonaction.

 

That's it exactly - and very concisely stated. Unfortunately, I can't rep you at this time.

[archermoo]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

That's it exactly - and very concisely stated. Unfortunately' date=' I can't rep you at this time.[/quote']

 

I however was able to.

[casualplayer]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Trigger is just setting up an If-Then statement, conditions satisfied something happens. Personally I like to avoid the meta-Ifs and limit them to actual situations perceivable in-game, but the rules allow for Triggers that rely on out-of-character, bookkeeping knowledge.

 

All this discussion has led me to think that REC is actually an implied Elemental Control. Maybe REC is an abreviation for Recovery EC! The slots in the EC are an Aid to STUN/END Extra Time: Full Phase, an Aid to STUN/END Triggered by post-12 if character's STUN >= -10, appropriate STUN/END Aids for each of the negative STUN multiples and a slow AID to BODY. All 0 END, Self Only, Continuous, Persistant, Only to stat capacity, etc, etc.

 

So anyway, to do what the OP suggested I would set up an Aid Self Only Continuous Always On Persistent 0 END Only up to starting values and buy the capacity up to whatever the amount of STUN is from, say, -20 to starting value. Due to the lovely cheese of being able to have Aid affect groups of related stats or powers with a single power slot, I would probably have this affect CON, BODY, END and STUN. A d6 of Aid should suffice and a 66 pt capacity should suffice. It'll be pricey, it'll blow the AP doors right off most campaigns, and it'll make the character almost impossible to knock out or kill unless you make them comatose.

[Era Scarecrow]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

I think a lot of people want to heal faster than they are injured. 1 BOD Regen does not do this in many games.

 

Perhaps what we need is modified speed.

 

 

 

Except that once you fall below -10 STUN, you cannot take a recovery anyway. Higher SPD does not increase your recovery rate under those conditions.

 

Inherent just means it can't be drained or suppressed, so it seems to add nothing.

 

Sorry, meant Persistant (It's already kinda inherent..)

 

The other thought, was healing, which would slowly take you out of DM's option land

 

Healing stun 1d6(Standard effect 3), only to restore to original values. END0, Persistant, Always on, Extra time (1 turn, 12th segment), limited (only works when below -9 stun)

 

One would think this might work. Not exactly triggered, but might be close enough.??

 

Era

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

I however was able to.

 

AAAARRRRRGHHHH!!!

 

I can't even REP archermoo for repping SteveZilla for me!!!

 

AAAARRRRRGHHHH!!!

 

 

hmmmm...maybe if I buy my REP with a Trigger...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

The other thought, was healing, which would slowly take you out of DM's option land

 

Healing stun 1d6(Standard effect 3), only to restore to original values. END0, Persistant, Always on, Extra time (1 turn, 12th segment), limited (only works when below -9 stun)

 

Healing always only takes you to original values. This looks like STUN Regeneration, with the added "only if below -9" limitation. I'd be inclined to alow that at 1d6 = standard effect 2 (just like Regeneration) and overide the maximum effect (again,just like regeneration), assuming I was OK with a character who effectively cannot be put down for the count.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

AAAARRRRRGHHHH!!!

 

I can't even REP archermoo for repping SteveZilla for me!!!

 

AAAARRRRRGHHHH!!!

 

 

hmmmm...maybe if I buy my REP with a Trigger...

 

[SteveZilla]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Trigger is just setting up an If-Then statement' date=' conditions satisfied something happens. Personally I like to avoid the meta-Ifs and limit them to actual situations perceivable in-game, but the rules allow for Triggers that rely on out-of-character, bookkeeping knowledge.[/quote']

 

Doesn't Trigger already say that it only uses those senses the character has (but special ones can be purchased just for the Trigger)?

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

I intended to comment that you:

 

- view the failure to allow Trigger to create an automatic "take a recovery" action as an arbitrary restriction to the rules.

 

- disallow many standard uses of Trigger, when applied to REC using your interpretation of the rules.

So? There are plenty of "standard uses" of powers that would be abusive even though they're consistant with the rules. I don't see what the problem is. I'm saying that I would allow the Triggered REC as the OP suggested ten pages ago (for some price) as a reasonable and non-abusive construct. That doesn't mean I must also allow Triggered REC in an unreasonable and abusive construct. Is this rocket science?

 

How is it any less arbitrary to conclude that Trigger applied to REC does not create a "take a recovery" action than to conclude that we must restrict the rules for Trigger in order to allow Triggered REC to allow a "take a recovery" action?

I'm not restricting the rules for Trigger. I'm restricting certain specific builds as abusive.

 

Would you allow, for example, an automatically resetting Trigger to grant a recovery each time the character is hit?

Possibly, but there are much cleaner ways to build such an ability. Additional Defenses, for example.

 

Would you similarly disallow an automatically resetting Trigger that would apply a Healing power of equivalent cost?

Probably, but I don't know why any player would buy it, because it would cost more than just buying additional points of PD and ED. 1d6 of Triggered Healing (automatic reset, 0 END, Persistent, etc.) would cost at least 27 points, and would Heal 3.5 cp worth of STUN or BODY. For an additional +1/2 (bringing the cost to 32 or more), you could heal 3.5 cp of STUN and BODY (assuming you want the additional 0.5 that you don't get with Standard Effect) - that's 3.5 STUN and 1.75 BODY. For 15 points, you can have +5 rED and +5 rPD and define the SFX as "I instantly heal up to 5 points of damage from every attack." This prevents up to 5 STUN and 5 BODY from *every* attack for half the cost. Does that seem unbalanced to you?

 

What if it Triggered teleportation?

Sure, why not?

 

A retaliatory attack?

Sure, why not?

 

These are all the same trigger, applied to different abilities. To me, all seem prima facie acceptable except the REC one. The fact that the REC one is overpowered is, to me, evidence that extrapolating a free "take a recovery" action out of Trigger is an inappropriate and unbalanced interpretation of the rules.

I don't see the REC one as being overpowered. And there can be no such thing as "unbalanced" until you set a price. To be able to Recover 100 STUN, END, and BODY every segment is far too powerful for say 5 points. To be able to Recover 1 STUN per turn, only while unconscious (below -10 STUN) is far too weak for 100 points. Somewhere between those two extremes is a balanced construct. So why not allow it?

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

The slots in the EC are an Aid to STUN/END Extra Time: Full Phase' date=' an Aid to STUN/END Triggered by post-12 if character's STUN >= -10, appropriate STUN/END Aids for each of the negative STUN multiples and a slow AID to BODY. All 0 END, Self Only, Continuous, Persistant, Only to stat capacity, etc, etc.[/quote']

Except that Aid fades. What you need is Healing, and then either use the "Regeneration Handwave" to allow it to reset immediately or be unlimited-Cumulative, or add on the Reduced Reset time Advantage (which would make it even more expensive).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

So? There are plenty of "standard uses" of powers that would be abusive even though they're consistant with the rules. I don't see what the problem is. I'm saying that I would allow the Triggered REC as the OP suggested ten pages ago (for some price) as a reasonable and non-abusive construct. That doesn't mean I must also allow Triggered REC in an unreasonable and abusive construct. Is this rocket science?

 

Emphasis mine. Are you suggesting that Triggered REC should have some cost other than applying the Trigger advantage to the cost of REC?

 

Possibly' date=' but there are much cleaner ways to build such an ability. Additional Defenses, for example.[/quote']

 

Defenses do not recover END, nor would they cause STUN to increase in the event the STUN damage inflicted were less than the REC triggered. On the other side, triggered REC would not reduce the BOD damage taken, where defenses would. There are lots of differences.

 

Probably' date=' but I don't know why any player would buy it, because it would cost more than just buying additional points of PD and ED. 1d6 of Triggered Healing (automatic reset, 0 END, Persistent, etc.) would cost at least 27 points, and would Heal 3.5 cp worth of STUN or BODY. For an additional +1/2 (bringing the cost to 32 or more), you could heal 3.5 cp of STUN and BODY (assuming you want the additional 0.5 that you don't get with Standard Effect) - that's 3.5 STUN and 1.75 BODY. For 15 points, you can have +5 rED and +5 rPD and define the SFX as "I instantly heal up to 5 points of damage from every attack." This prevents up to 5 STUN and 5 BODY from *every* attack for half the cost. Does that seem unbalanced to you?[/quote']

 

1d6 STUN Healing (10 points), Trigger w/ Autoreset (+3/4), 0 END (+1/2), Persistent (+1/2) = 27 AP, so I'm with you so far. Self Only is -1/2 by the book (probably should be more), so that's 18 points. +5 rPD and +5 rED does not reduce the STUN taken by an NND, an AVLD, or a STUN Drain or Transfer. If I had 20 PD to begin with, a 23 point Punch results in no damage if I buy extra defenses, but recovers 2 STUN taken previously using the Heal construct. They may have the same cost, but their effects are quite different. The Heal defends against much more, but I need to increase the cost to avoid it capping out at 6 points for the day, and by the book it will cap out at 6 per turn. Bringing that down to per turn bumps the cost to 42 AP/28 RP. To me, that's overpriced, but only because "self only" is undervalued.

 

I don't see the REC one as being overpowered. And there can be no such thing as "unbalanced" until you set a price. To be able to Recover 100 STUN' date=' END, and BODY every segment is far too powerful for say 5 points. To be able to Recover 1 STUN per turn, only while unconscious (below -10 STUN) is far too weak for 100 points. Somewhere between those two extremes is a balanced construct. So why not allow it?[/quote']

 

The price is the same price as a Trigger. To recover 10 STUN and END each time you are hit would cost 15 points (a +3/4 Naked Advantage on 10 points of REC). Unless you propose to change the price of Trigger when applied to REC.

[casualplayer]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Except that Aid fades. What you need is Healing' date=' and then either use the "Regeneration Handwave" to allow it to reset immediately or be unlimited-Cumulative, or add on the Reduced Reset time Advantage (which would make it even more expensive).[/quote']

 

Can't say what I think of the Healing or Regeneration Handwaive without getting banned so let's move on....

 

If the Aid is Continuous it'll fill the bucket faster than the fade rate empties it, netting some gain. Just trying to get some insight into the Recovery room. Really wishing that HERO made REC the blanket amount that a diminished stat recovered, not just BODY, END and STUN. If REC wasn't such a kludge, we could slap some Advantages and Limitations on it and accomplish an amazing amount of stuff.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

Are you suggesting that Triggered REC should have some cost other than applying the Trigger advantage to the cost of REC?

No.

 

Defenses do not recover END, nor would they cause STUN to increase in the event the STUN damage inflicted were less than the REC triggered. On the other side, triggered REC would not reduce the BOD damage taken, where defenses would. There are lots of differences.

True. I was still thinking in terms of recovering STUN, which is what the thread was originally about.

 

With all the benefits you describe then, no, I probably wouldn't allow such a build. He could just hit himself whenever he wanted to take a recovery.

 

The price is the same price as a Trigger. To recover 10 STUN and END each time you are hit would cost 15 points (a +3/4 Naked Advantage on 10 points of REC). Unless you propose to change the price of Trigger when applied to REC.

Assuming the GM lets you buy it for that price. IIRC, Trigger doesn't have a caution sign on it, but it should. The listed price doesn't change based on what the specific trigger is. A power triggered to go off whenever I get hit by any attack has the same advantage as a power triggered to go off whenever I get kissed by a princess. GMs are allowed to apply common sense and not charge the same price for these two powers which vary greatly in usefulness.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

True. I was still thinking in terms of recovering STUN' date=' which is what the thread was originally about.[/quote']

 

Most uses of trigger on REC would presumably result in recovery of both STUN and END. Only a trigger requiring the character be KO'd would not.

 

With all the benefits you describe then' date=' no, I probably wouldn't allow such a build. He could just hit himself whenever he wanted to take a recovery.[/quote']

 

So what would that character need to buy? "Only if he takes STUN"? "REC cannot exceed STUN inflicted by most recent attack"?

 

Assuming the GM lets you buy it for that price. IIRC' date=' Trigger doesn't have a caution sign on it, but it should. The listed price doesn't change based on what the specific trigger is. A power triggered to go off whenever I get hit by any attack has the same advantage as a power triggered to go off whenever I get kissed by a princess. GMs are allowed to apply common sense and not charge the same price for these two powers which vary greatly in usefulness.[/quote']

 

Then we get into the issue of what the baseline should be. You want to raise the price for common triggers, but one could just as easily argue the price should be reduced if the trigger is uncommon. After all, "I say the magic word" is a legitimate trigger. There is even provision for reducing the advantage if the character does not personally control the activation of his trigger, implying that such control is the standard, and triggers that are more difficult and/or uncertain to activate should cost less.

 

Ultimately, I have to question why putting Trigger on REC to get STUN (and maybe END) back should be less expensive than putting Trigger on Healing to get STUN back.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

So what would that character need to buy? "Only if he takes STUN"? "REC cannot exceed STUN inflicted by most recent attack"?

Assuming you want the ability described in your earlier post (regain X STUN and END every time the character is hit), I'd probably require it to be built as Triggered Healing, with Reduced Reset Time.

 

Then we get into the issue of what the baseline should be. You want to raise the price for common triggers, but one could just as easily argue the price should be reduced if the trigger is uncommon.

In fact I might argue for both. I can't recall ever having a player want a Trigger that was either "too common" or "too uncommon" nor have I ever wanted such a thing either. Most of the time, players use Trigger for "normal" things that are based in more-or-less real-world SFX, such as land mines, or Triggered powers that come into play in a more "natural" way that you'd expect based on common sense, such as Gliding, Only to gently fall to the ground, Triggered by falling more than 1". I would consider the Triggered REC to help you wake up from a coma faster to be in this category. Triggered REC to recover whenever you're below starting values, or whenever you're hit, I would not consider to be in this category.

 

After all, "I say the magic word" is a legitimate trigger. There is even provision for reducing the advantage if the character does not personally control the activation of his trigger, implying that such control is the standard, and triggers that are more difficult and/or uncertain to activate should cost less.

And I agree with this. I don't have 5ER with its new Trigger rules, but my understanding was that it's an increased Advantage to be able to Trigger the power yourself, only the fly (such as by saying a magic word, or some other zero-time action).

 

In the case that started this thread (Recover STUN when below -10), this wouldn't apply. People can't normally induce a coma in themselves, and there'd be no benefit in deliberately knocking yourself unconscious only to have the benefit of waking up faster.

 

Ultimately, I have to question why putting Trigger on REC to get STUN (and maybe END) back should be less expensive than putting Trigger on Healing to get STUN back.

It shouldn't. I never said otherwise. The Advantage is the same in either case. But if the defined Trigger is so common that it makes the power much more useful, then I see no problem in charging more for it, regardless of whether it's done via REC or Healing.

 

And if the triggering condition is so rare that it's less useful then normal, it should cost less, and can take a Limitation well within the rules, such as "Only works when kissed by a Princess." In fact, in many such cases, you'd take the circumstantial Limitation, *instead* of the Trigger Advantage.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Triggered Recovery?

 

I don't have 5ER with its new Trigger rules' date=' but my understanding was that it's an increased Advantage to be able to Trigger the power yourself, only the fly (such as by saying a magic word, or some other zero-time action).[/quote']

 

The default is a single defined condition, or series of related conditions. A radio controlled bomb, for example (in the sidebar), is set off by a radio signal.

 

The default for triggers the character activates by an action of their own requires a zero phase action by default. It can be an action that takes no time (ie need not be in your phase) for +1/4 more. You'd need that extra +1/4 to be able to say "ouch" at your discretion. At base levels, you can only activate the trigger on your own phase.

 

The advantage can be reduced by 1/4 if the character does not control the Trigger, at the GM's option and for personal powers. An example given is an Aid that is Triggered by going berserk.