Is Leaping too Cheap?

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Also the rules about having to decelerate to 0" is a balance thing that makes me splinter teeth. If I leap upwards and forwards, that means, even if I'm in the air for a couple of turns, because of NCM, I can't turn on my flight until I land?

 

That is, frankly, barmy. I can say that because it is not September any more.

 

No, it means that it works like that if you put the two powers in a multipower that can't run them both at the same time. If you buy them outside of a multipower, or in a multipower that lets you run them both at the same time, you can do it. Part of the limitation of buying things in a multipower.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

No' date=' it means that it works like that if you put the two powers in a multipower that can't run them both at the same time. If you buy them outside of a multipower, or in a multipower that lets you run them both at the same time, you can do it. Part of the limitation of buying things in a multipower.[/quote']

 

How did multipower get dragged in to the conversation?

 

As I currently understand them the rules allow you to mix 2 types of movements in 1 phase but only by making a discrete* half move with each.

 

*By discrete I mean that the ending velocity is zero at the end of the half move.

 

This was essentially the same reason that Steve gave for disallowing an idea I had in '04 for combining Flight and Teleport in one move to create a 'Indirect-like' Move Through or Move By.

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

How did multipower get dragged in to the conversation?

 

As I currently understand them the rules allow you to mix 2 types of movements in 1 phase but only by making a discrete* half move with each.

 

*By discrete I mean that the ending velocity is zero at the end of the half move.

 

This was essentially the same reason that Steve gave for disallowing an idea I had in '04 for combining Flight and Teleport in one move to create a 'Indirect-like' Move Through or Move By.

 

Sean was talking about not liking the rule that you had to get down to 0" velocity with a movement power before you could switch the points out of it in a multipower. Specifically giving the example that if he is doing a long NCM leap he can't switch from Leaping to Flight during the leap. The rules only say that you can't switch the points in a Multipower out of a movement slot until you get to 0" velocity. So if the powers aren't in a Multipower you could in theory fire up your flight before you land from a multi-phase leap.

 

So, to answer your question, Multipower got dragged into the conversation because Sean brought it up.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Sean was talking about not liking the rule that you had to get down to 0" velocity with a movement power before you could switch the points out of it in a multipower. Specifically giving the example that if he is doing a long NCM leap he can't switch from Leaping to Flight during the leap. The rules only say that you can't switch the points in a Multipower out of a movement slot until you get to 0" velocity. So if the powers aren't in a Multipower you could in theory fire up your flight before you land from a multi-phase leap.

 

So, to answer your question, Multipower got dragged into the conversation because Sean brought it up.

 

I don't like it because it makes no sense. The same reason I don't like the rule that leaping acceleration follows the same rules for other movement powers working with NCM. That doesn't make any sense from this (I appreciate) highly esoteric viewpoint: the numbers don't add up.

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

I don't like it because it makes no sense. The same reason I don't like the rule that leaping acceleration follows the same rules for other movement powers working with NCM. That doesn't make any sense from this (I appreciate) highly esoteric viewpoint: the numbers don't add up.

 

To me at least it makes perfect sense. You can't take the points out of a power that you are still using. Until you have landed, you aren't done Leaping, so you can't take the points out of it. If you want to Leap up and then Fly, you have to buy them such that you can use both at the same time.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

To me at least it makes perfect sense. You can't take the points out of a power that you are still using. Until you have landed' date=' you aren't done Leaping, so you can't take the points out of it. If you want to Leap up and then Fly, you have to buy them such that you can use both at the same time.[/quote']

 

I'm a thousand feet up in the air and I switch away from leaping. I'm no longer controlling my movement, but, as you can't control your leaping movement anyway, so what? I'm in freefall, but my momentum hasn't changed, so I'm not hitting the ground before my next phase anyway.

 

I switch on my flight, now I'm controlling my movement again.

 

How can it make sense that I can normally switch slots (at least) once per phase, but in this specific situation, and for reason as that, it seems to me, are related to game balance*, I can't?

 

Can you explain the 'leaping acceleration is the same as other movement powers' rule EXCEPT as a transparently 'balancing' mechanic?

 

I mean, we either have to have the courage of our convictions and say that balance matters most, or we have to have the courage of our convictions and say internal consistency matters most.

 

It seems to me that such decisions are pretty arbitrary, and why not? I mean we arbitrarily treat the point as some sort of yardstick, whereas in reality it is is a different 'length' depending on what we are measuring with it. Perhaps it is time for a fundamental re-examination of the princples underlying Hero, or even an acceptance that there are such principles. Roll on November, eh?

 

Sorry, we were talking about leaping, yeah?

 

Simple answer to the question is that a GM should look at the point cost of the power and allow that mnuch utility, sot he character with 30 points in flight shoudl find it twice as useful as the character with 30 points in leaping.

 

Good luck with that.

 

 

 

 

*And I would not mind this so much if we were consistent about game balance, but we are not. Witness 'Supress'.

[mmshah]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

I was wondering how really long leaps work, I tried to use 5R to figure it out but it didnt seem to make sense, maybe someone can explain it to me. For example if one has Leaping 1" (Megascale +1/4) then you can leap 1 Km. But you have to make an attack roll with applicable range modifers (-14 for 1 Km) assuming you have a OCV of 3 then ure target number is 11 - 14 + 3 -3 = -3, so even if you roll a 3 your off by 6 which means your off by 6 Km, but you can only jump 1 km. Now I know it says the GM can adjust this but it seems like these rules dont work at all even in this minimalist case. Maybe the scatter should be 1 down the Megascale chart as your Leaping so in this case the order of magnitude of scatter would in back down to " (2m) in scale.

 

Also if using the realistic Leaping rules in Ultimate brick, super-strong characters can leap, Megascale type distances but since they dont use megascale, when they fail their to hit rolls they are off only by a nominal amount compared to the distance Leaped, which seems far too accurate. Am I interpreting these rules incorrectly? Or is there a better way to determine the accuracy of long leaps?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

I was wondering how really long leaps work, I tried to use 5R to figure it out but it didnt seem to make sense, maybe someone can explain it to me. For example if one has Leaping 1" (Megascale +1/4) then you can leap 1 Km. But you have to make an attack roll with applicable range modifers (-14 for 1 Km) assuming you have a OCV of 3 then ure target number is 11 - 14 + 3 -3 = -3, so even if you roll a 3 your off by 6 which means your off by 6 Km, but you can only jump 1 km. Now I know it says the GM can adjust this but it seems like these rules dont work at all even in this minimalist case. Maybe the scatter should be 1 down the Megascale chart as your Leaping so in this case the order of magnitude of scatter would in back down to " (2m) in scale.

 

Also if using the realistic Leaping rules in Ultimate brick, super-strong characters can leap, Megascale type distances but since they dont use megascale, when they fail their to hit rolls they are off only by a nominal amount compared to the distance Leaped, which seems far too accurate. Am I interpreting these rules incorrectly? Or is there a better way to determine the accuracy of long leaps?

 

 

1. Try not to use the words 'megascale' and 'realistic' in the same, well, universe. They are mutually exclusive.

 

2. Well, there isn't a 2., but I figured 1. was such a biggie that it probably wouldn't all fit in.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

I'd base it on the circumstances. If they dive out of a 5th story window to avoid a bomb or other attack or are knocked out the window' date=' they'll have to roll. If they're simply jumping off intentionally, I probably wouldn't require a roll unless Unluck or some other factor complicates matters.[/quote']

Yes. And I just thought of another circumstance that would require a roll: if you're carrying someone down with you (presumably someone more delicate than you) or something of significant weight.

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

I'm a thousand feet up in the air and I switch away from leaping. I'm no longer controlling my movement, but, as you can't control your leaping movement anyway, so what? I'm in freefall, but my momentum hasn't changed, so I'm not hitting the ground before my next phase anyway.

 

I switch on my flight, now I'm controlling my movement again.

 

How can it make sense that I can normally switch slots (at least) once per phase, but in this specific situation, and for reason as that, it seems to me, are related to game balance*, I can't?

 

Can you explain the 'leaping acceleration is the same as other movement powers' rule EXCEPT as a transparently 'balancing' mechanic?

 

I mean, we either have to have the courage of our convictions and say that balance matters most, or we have to have the courage of our convictions and say internal consistency matters most.

 

It seems to me that such decisions are pretty arbitrary, and why not? I mean we arbitrarily treat the point as some sort of yardstick, whereas in reality it is is a different 'length' depending on what we are measuring with it. Perhaps it is time for a fundamental re-examination of the princples underlying Hero, or even an acceptance that there are such principles. Roll on November, eh?

 

Sorry, we were talking about leaping, yeah?

 

Simple answer to the question is that a GM should look at the point cost of the power and allow that mnuch utility, sot he character with 30 points in flight shoudl find it twice as useful as the character with 30 points in leaping.

 

Good luck with that.

 

 

 

 

*And I would not mind this so much if we were consistent about game balance, but we are not. Witness 'Supress'.

 

So why are the only options "only balance" and "only internal consistancy"? It seems to me that what is needed is a balance of the two. And that is, to the best of my knowledge, what Steve is going for.

 

I would also say that if what you are looking for is a power set that allows you to leap 1000' into the air and then start flying, picking a rules construct that specifically disallows that is probably not the way to do it. You can do it, just not within the type of multipower that you outlined earlier.

 

And certainly the "all movement powers accelerate at the same rate" rule is in there for balance. If you feel the balance that it brings isn't worth the power making less intuitive sense to you, don't use it.

 

Personally, I'd say the key principle underlying Hero is "Enjoy yourself".

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

I was wondering how really long leaps work, I tried to use 5R to figure it out but it didnt seem to make sense, maybe someone can explain it to me. For example if one has Leaping 1" (Megascale +1/4) then you can leap 1 Km. But you have to make an attack roll with applicable range modifers (-14 for 1 Km) assuming you have a OCV of 3 then ure target number is 11 - 14 + 3 -3 = -3, so even if you roll a 3 your off by 6 which means your off by 6 Km, but you can only jump 1 km. Now I know it says the GM can adjust this but it seems like these rules dont work at all even in this minimalist case. Maybe the scatter should be 1 down the Megascale chart as your Leaping so in this case the order of magnitude of scatter would in back down to " (2m) in scale.

 

Also if using the realistic Leaping rules in Ultimate brick, super-strong characters can leap, Megascale type distances but since they dont use megascale, when they fail their to hit rolls they are off only by a nominal amount compared to the distance Leaped, which seems far too accurate. Am I interpreting these rules incorrectly? Or is there a better way to determine the accuracy of long leaps?

 

Well, it isn't surprising that there might be some oddities when buying 1" of a movement power. Buying more inches of movement evens that kind of thing out. This type of thing is one of the reasons that previous versions of the rules had minimum point expenditures for the powers.

[mmshah]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Sure I can see that, but I used a perfect roll in that example, with an average roll of say 11, then your off by 14 Km. I suppose to make that even remotely reasonable you could be required to buy Leaping 14" with megascale (+1/4), but then trying to jump 14 Km would have a -22 Range Mod, resulting in a 14Km jump with 22Km scatter on average. That still doesnt seem too reasonable to me so lets try again with say 24" with megascale (+1/4), then on a 24 Km jump, we have a -24 Range Mod for an average scatter off 24 Km. At least your jumping in the right direction this time, but I still dont like the results.

 

And with higher lv of Megascale more " of the base power would be required for it to make any sense. For example with Megascale (+1/2) on 32" Leaping gives -32 Range Mod with a 320 Km jump and 320 Km of scatter.

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Sure I can see that, but I used a perfect roll in that example, with an average roll of say 11, then your off by 14 Km. I suppose to make that even remotely reasonable you could be required to buy Leaping 14" with megascale (+1/4), but then trying to jump 14 Km would have a -22 Range Mod, resulting in a 14Km jump with 22Km scatter on average. That still doesnt seem too reasonable to me so lets try again with say 24" with megascale (+1/4), then on a 24 Km jump, we have a -24 Range Mod for an average scatter off 24 Km. At least your jumping in the right direction this time, but I still dont like the results.

 

And with higher lv of Megascale more " of the base power would be required for it to make any sense. For example with Megascale (+1/2) on 32" Leaping gives -32 Range Mod with a 320 Km jump and 320 Km of scatter.

 

Well, part of the point is that if you are using megascale movement, you should really have megascale perception. Otherwise you are likely to not end up very near where you wanted to be.

[mmshah]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Clearly, but when you jump East, you're gunna end up East of where you started, not West, which is 50% likely if you dont have the required minimum levels as in the above examples. Hence my proposition of using scatter on a scale of 1 level down the Megascale chart. Only problem arises at the (+1/4) level, since +0 would be normal scale and too accurate.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Clearly' date=' but when you jump East, you're gunna end up East of where you started, not West, which is 50% likely if you dont have the required minimum levels as in the above examples. Hence my proposition of using scatter on a scale of 1 level down the Megascale chart. Only problem arises at the (+1/4) level, since +0 would be normal scale and too accurate.[/quote']

 

Judging by the direction sense of about half the people I know ... Ending up East of where they started when attempting to travel East is not a given.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

So why are the only options "only balance" and "only internal consistancy"? It seems to me that what is needed is a balance of the two. And that is, to the best of my knowledge, what Steve is going for.

 

I would also say that if what you are looking for is a power set that allows you to leap 1000' into the air and then start flying, picking a rules construct that specifically disallows that is probably not the way to do it. You can do it, just not within the type of multipower that you outlined earlier.

 

And certainly the "all movement powers accelerate at the same rate" rule is in there for balance. If you feel the balance that it brings isn't worth the power making less intuitive sense to you, don't use it.

 

Personally, I'd say the key principle underlying Hero is "Enjoy yourself".

 

We can certainly agree about the goal of all of this, and I enjoy both playing the game and arguing about...er, discussing it.

 

Personally though one of the things that bugs me is the lack of consistent approach to balance issues. I'm not suggesting for a moment that we have to be all balance or all internal consistency, but because Hero does not 'do' game and design philosophy, it seems to me that there are no guiding principles as to where to pitch the 'balance balance'. This leads to different approaches with different powers - some are 'all' balance, some are 'all' internal consistency and some are in between.

 

To take an example, I can't see why you need a rule with multipowers that you have to decelerate to 0" before switching on another movement power in the multi. I don't really get how that is a balance issue. Sure it would allow you to use leaping to get around the slow initial acceleration of most other movement powers, but, if that is a 'balance' issue then:

 

1. We have advantages for movement powers that enable you to get around slow acceleration anyway,

 

2. You are paying more points for something that, frankly, is not often going to be an issue, and

 

3. If the thing looks unbalanced, abusive or simply does not make in-game sense, the GM should be the one to say 'no'*.

 

I think that is probably what bugs me most about overt balancing - it rather assumes an inadequate GM. Sure flag it up as a potential issue, but, and this applies especially with Hero where the game feels like it was constructed rather than just congealed, I think we need to assume that the underlying principles are sound and that the whole thing hangs together pretty well without all the tinkering. You won't do away with the potential for abuse no matter how much you fuss over it, so let us add a short chapter on Abuse Policing and Enjoyment Enforcement (what?) and ditch all the ad hoc interventions speckling the rules.

 

 

* You may counter that a GM can always say 'yes' but in practice that is less likely to occur - players are less likely to be asking GMs for rule changes to let them get away with stuff IMO than a GM is to look at a character and ask of a bit of a re-write.

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

We can certainly agree about the goal of all of this, and I enjoy both playing the game and arguing about...er, discussing it.

 

Personally though one of the things that bugs me is the lack of consistent approach to balance issues. I'm not suggesting for a moment that we have to be all balance or all internal consistency, but because Hero does not 'do' game and design philosophy, it seems to me that there are no guiding principles as to where to pitch the 'balance balance'. This leads to different approaches with different powers - some are 'all' balance, some are 'all' internal consistency and some are in between.

 

To take an example, I can't see why you need a rule with multipowers that you have to decelerate to 0" before switching on another movement power in the multi. I don't really get how that is a balance issue. Sure it would allow you to use leaping to get around the slow initial acceleration of most other movement powers, but, if that is a 'balance' issue then:

 

1. We have advantages for movement powers that enable you to get around slow acceleration anyway,

 

2. You are paying more points for something that, frankly, is not often going to be an issue, and

 

3. If the thing looks unbalanced, abusive or simply does not make in-game sense, the GM should be the one to say 'no'*.

 

I think that is probably what bugs me most about overt balancing - it rather assumes an inadequate GM. Sure flag it up as a potential issue, but, and this applies especially with Hero where the game feels like it was constructed rather than just congealed, I think we need to assume that the underlying principles are sound and that the whole thing hangs together pretty well without all the tinkering. You won't do away with the potential for abuse no matter how much you fuss over it, so let us add a short chapter on Abuse Policing and Enjoyment Enforcement (what?) and ditch all the ad hoc interventions speckling the rules.

 

 

* You may counter that a GM can always say 'yes' but in practice that is less likely to occur - players are less likely to be asking GMs for rule changes to let them get away with stuff IMO than a GM is to look at a character and ask of a bit of a re-write.

 

A couple of notes:

 

The rule isn't specific to Multipowers. It just generally says that you cannot switch off a Movement Power until you have dropped to 0" velocity, or until the GM says you can. It also notes that this means you cannot switch the points away from the Power in a Multipower, but that doesn't make it specific to Multipowers.

 

Also, even without this rule you still cannot use Leaping to "get around" the "slow" initial accel for other movement powers. Leaping accelerates at the same rate as any other movement power.

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Clearly' date=' but when you jump East, you're gunna end up East of where you started, not West, which is 50% likely if you dont have the required minimum levels as in the above examples. Hence my proposition of using scatter on a scale of 1 level down the Megascale chart. Only problem arises at the (+1/4) level, since +0 would be normal scale and too accurate.[/quote']

 

Again, it is pointing up the problem with moving at Megascale without being able to perceive Megascale. Yes, you will not likely end up where you wanted to. And you might even end up in an entirely different direction. This is what can happen when you are effectively working blind.

[mmshah]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

With a movement power like Running I could maybe swallow that, you cant see where your going and make a few wrong turns and wind backwards from your starting point. But with Leaping you cant change direction once you start, if you wind you west of your origin point, you jumped west at the start. I mean if your in NYC face west close your eyes and jump, theres really no chance of you ending up in the Atlantic Ocean. And theres also the point that the scatter can be many times the furthest distance one can jump, I mean these rules seem preposterous at best. No one has indicated that Im somehow interpreting these rules incorrectly and I read one of the questions in the FAQ that pretty much seems to confirm thats this is how they work, and to me it really seems like they need some adjusting. I mean even with Megascale perception, you dont get X-ray vision (unless you buy that) so you still mostly likely cant see where your going (since you have to see when you start the jump on level ground, as you cant change direction mid jump) and wind up with the same problem.

 

But lets take the second example I mentioned at the start, using the Realistic Leaping rules for super-strength characters in Ultimate Brick, these have the opposite problem jumps are far too accurate. I mean 13,000 miles is the longest Earthly jump one needs to make and is a Range Modifier of -44, so your only off by 44 Hexes or worst case 51 Hexes.

[casualplayer]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Maybe a jetstream blew you off course?

 

Leaping is a silly mechanic at large distances because in the comics it has always been a silly mechanic and HERO is still corrupted by genre bias. You can't tell me that the Hulk never came down on an elementary school, all half-ton of him, or that Superman leapt a tall building and didn't come down on a pedestrian on the other side. Reality need not apply.

[Just Joe]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

Wow, I finally get around to checking replies and there are 5 pages! You guys are great.

 

Thanks for the replies. I'm going to focus on only a small subset. The comments on NCM and megascale were interesting, for example, but are of little practical use to me because I'm not fond of the underlying rules and have little or no involvement in campaigns in which they might be appropriate anyway. I will also say that while Archermoo's attitude about balance and consistency strikes me as entirely reasonable, nevertheless my sympathy in this case (as in most cases involving Hero System rules) is with Sean Waters.

 

Regarding physics, leaping and enclosed spaces: given fixed gravity, starting point A, and ending point B, there are (infinitely) many leaping trajectories that could get one from A to B. One could take a higher or lower arcing trajectory, and it is not clear what the minimum height for a given horizontal distance should be. As for the official Hero System rules on the matter, I have not pored over them as carefully as I'm sure I should have, but the -1 limitation "Forward Movement Only" (5ER, p. 197) suggests that one need not leap high to leap far. And, BTW, if one takes this limitation, leaping becomes even less versatile, but also stunningly cheap.

 

Quick edit: forgot to say that one could price leaping as 3 points per 2". I certainly would not advocate 2 / 1" (unless with a mandatory limitation, as per the excellent suggestion above regarding reconciling END cost for all forms of movement -- in which case I would suggest a limitation of perhaps -1/2 for leaping, rather than -1)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

A couple of notes:

 

The rule isn't specific to Multipowers. It just generally says that you cannot switch off a Movement Power until you have dropped to 0" velocity, or until the GM says you can. It also notes that this means you cannot switch the points away from the Power in a Multipower, but that doesn't make it specific to Multipowers.

 

Also, even without this rule you still cannot use Leaping to "get around" the "slow" initial accel for other movement powers. Leaping accelerates at the same rate as any other movement power.

 

My problem is that I just can't see that working.

 

To me the best of game mechanics should be able to be transparent when necessary: someone who is completely unfamiliar with the system but has a prose description of the character they are playing should be able to describe what they are doing to the GM who should then be able to translate that into system mechanics, and the player should get an expected result, applying common sense, rudimentary science and dramatic stotytelling.

 

Rules designed to bring balance to the game, like anything designed or expected to bring balance* rarely leave everyone as happy bunnies at the end of the day. Certainly not me**. My problem here is that it offends against the above test.

 

I think that most people, able to suspend their disbelief sufficiently to play a character who can both leap a long way and fly would expect to be able to fly without having landed first. That's the intuitive answer.

 

If I fall off a building I can switch on my flight before I hit the ground. If I jump off it I can't switch on my flight until I land. Eh?

 

Moreover it is just tinkering for the hell of it. It is unnecessary. When is anyone ever going to complain that it is not fair because The Flapping Leaper was able to start, well, flapping, half way through a superleap (as I still persist in calling it)?

 

I can't even see the balance issue that is being addressed by this rule.

 

Anyway, I trust my point is made, if not accepted.

 

 

 

 

*I'm looking at you, Annakin.

 

** And certainly not the Jedi Council.

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

My problem is that I just can't see that working.

 

To me the best of game mechanics should be able to be transparent when necessary: someone who is completely unfamiliar with the system but has a prose description of the character they are playing should be able to describe what they are doing to the GM who should then be able to translate that into system mechanics, and the player should get an expected result, applying common sense, rudimentary science and dramatic stotytelling.

 

Rules designed to bring balance to the game, like anything designed or expected to bring balance* rarely leave everyone as happy bunnies at the end of the day. Certainly not me**. My problem here is that it offends against the above test.

 

I think that most people, able to suspend their disbelief sufficiently to play a character who can both leap a long way and fly would expect to be able to fly without having landed first. That's the intuitive answer.

 

If I fall off a building I can switch on my flight before I hit the ground. If I jump off it I can't switch on my flight until I land. Eh?

 

Moreover it is just tinkering for the hell of it. It is unnecessary. When is anyone ever going to complain that it is not fair because The Flapping Leaper was able to start, well, flapping, half way through a superleap (as I still persist in calling it)?

 

I can't even see the balance issue that is being addressed by this rule.

 

Anyway, I trust my point is made, if not accepted.

 

 

 

 

*I'm looking at you, Annakin.

 

** And certainly not the Jedi Council.

 

I understand your point, I just don't see that it is valid. You keep presenting Leaping and Flight as if the only way that they can be purchased is together in a multipower that can only run one or the other of them, but not both. That simply isn't the case. You can buy them both in such a way that you can turn them both on at the same time. Which would give you the ability to leap and then fly before you finished leaping. Just because you cannot do it AND save points by putting them in a multipower at the same time doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the system. It just means that you found one of the ways that multipowers limit you.

 

And as a note, the description of Leaping specifies that you are not required to land as part of your leap. You can leap to a point in the middle of the air if you want, at which point you'd likely start to fall.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

I understand your point, I just don't see that it is valid. You keep presenting Leaping and Flight as if the only way that they can be purchased is together in a multipower that can only run one or the other of them, but not both. That simply isn't the case. You can buy them both in such a way that you can turn them both on at the same time. Which would give you the ability to leap and then fly before you finished leaping. Just because you cannot do it AND save points by putting them in a multipower at the same time doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the system. It just means that you found one of the ways that multipowers limit you.

 

And as a note, the description of Leaping specifies that you are not required to land as part of your leap. You can leap to a point in the middle of the air if you want, at which point you'd likely start to fall.

 

 

To be fair my original example was in a mutlipower, but I've been ignoring that in my recent posts and if I understand what you posted earlier (I'm not at home and don't have 5ER with me - my bad) it makes no odds whether the powers are in a MP or not. Let us assume they are not then. The same problem occurs. As I understand it you have to reduce your velocity from one movement power to zero before you use another.

 

Even in a MP I can't see any balance issues with being able to switch slots before you reach your target hex.

 

On your final point, I accept that - I've been talking about landing and I should have been talking about reaching your target hex, but given that you cannot change your target hex once you start leaping, I think the point still stands.

 

I know I'm just moaning, and I know I can easily solve all my problems with a sharp knife*, but I do feel that the system is robust enough not to need special rules to balance out the bumps. If the special rules were not there we probably wouldn't realise the bumps were either.

 

An example of this is leaping acceleration. I never cared that you could get to a point nearby slightly quicker with NCM leaping than NCM flight - for a point further away, the NCM flight wins every time. Leaping has enough of its own problems to justify the cost differential. I'd be happy to give it that one little advantage and not worry about it, so I just do not see the need to apply the acceleration rules for other movement powers to leaping. It makes no sense in game or as a matter of maths. I mean, no one worries about teleport acceleration, do they? NCM TP just takes an extra phase, no matter how far you are going. Balanced? Probably not. Do I care? Not a bit.

 

 

 

* By cutting out the offending rule, obviously

[archermoo]

Re: Is Leaping too Cheap?

 

To be fair my original example was in a mutlipower, but I've been ignoring that in my recent posts and if I understand what you posted earlier (I'm not at home and don't have 5ER with me - my bad) it makes no odds whether the powers are in a MP or not. Let us assume they are not then. The same problem occurs. As I understand it you have to reduce your velocity from one movement power to zero before you use another.

 

Even in a MP I can't see any balance issues with being able to switch slots before you reach your target hex.

 

On your final point, I accept that - I've been talking about landing and I should have been talking about reaching your target hex, but given that you cannot change your target hex once you start leaping, I think the point still stands.

 

I know I'm just moaning, and I know I can easily solve all my problems with a sharp knife*, but I do feel that the system is robust enough not to need special rules to balance out the bumps. If the special rules were not there we probably wouldn't realise the bumps were either.

 

An example of this is leaping acceleration. I never cared that you could get to a point nearby slightly quicker with NCM leaping than NCM flight - for a point further away, the NCM flight wins every time. Leaping has enough of its own problems to justify the cost differential. I'd be happy to give it that one little advantage and not worry about it, so I just do not see the need to apply the acceleration rules for other movement powers to leaping. It makes no sense in game or as a matter of maths. I mean, no one worries about teleport acceleration, do they? NCM TP just takes an extra phase, no matter how far you are going. Balanced? Probably not. Do I care? Not a bit.

 

 

 

* By cutting out the offending rule, obviously

 

But that isn't what 5ER says. It says you cannot turn off a movement power until you've reached 0" velocity from that power. It doesn't say that you cannot turn on another movement power until then.

 

The purpose of the rule from what I can tell is to stop people from thinking that they can come to an instant stop just by turning off their Flight.

 

Mostly I was just pointing out that the "loophole" you mentioned (being able to use Leaping to get a quick acceleration for your Flight) isn't a loophole in the system. It is only a loophole if you take a sharp knife to some of the existing rules. Kind of a cut your own loophole thing.

 

And I can think of at least one balance issue with allowing someone with Leaping in a MP to switch the points out mid-leap. One of the ways in which you are limited with a MP is that you can only get the effects of powers with active costs in total equal to or smaller than the MP pool. If you let people switch out of Leaping during the Leap, what's to stop them from switching out of Leaping during a multi-phase Leap, only to switch back in time to land?

 

The game mechanics in and of themselves do not describe the physics of the game world. We, as Refs and Players, decide how our Power constructs fit into the physics of the game world.