Clinging, UAA

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

I don't agree with this at all. This directly contradicts the example given in the UAA rules, and makes Desolid UAA far too effective as basically a insta-kill ability with a slight delay. Unless the target could breathe underground, they would suffocate, and if they are turned solid while in the ground they would take damage from materializing in a solid object and be trapped underground and unlikely to escape.

 

 

 

Well, if we start working off of what isn't stated in the rules vs what is stated, where does that leave us?

 

Your assertion also assumes that the mechanical effect of Clinging is necessarily based on a SFX related to "stickiness", that the users limbs are "sticky", that the user actively controls this "stickiness" as an active, conscious, constantly changing state. The rules state that the user "sticks" to a wall, but the means by which they do so -- the SFX -- can be diverse. It also assumes that Clinging is primarily a means of counteracting gravity, rather than a purchaseable mechanical effect that allows a character to move normally on surfaces they normally would not be able to. At root this is an argument from a SFX perspective rather than the actual mechanics.

 

 

 

That's assuming that your argument regarding is correct, even though it directly contradicts an example given in the UAA rules.

 

a. What example of UAA Desolidification are you referring to? I'm not attempting to argue that such a power wouldn't be imbalancing. I'm just saying it's possible to build legally by the rules.

 

b. This forum since the power in question is a holdover from the 1st edition of the rules.

 

c. from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cling

 

cling1 /klɪŋ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kling] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, clung, cling·ing, noun

–verb (used without object)

1. to adhere closely; stick to: The wet paper clings to the glass.

2. to hold tight, as by grasping or embracing; cleave: The children clung to each other in the dark.

3. to be or remain close: The child clung to her mother's side.

4. to remain attached, as to an idea, hope, memory, etc.: Despite the predictions, the candidate clung to the belief that he would be elected.

5. to cohere.

 

Stickiness is not a special effect. It's part of the definition of clinging.

 

Clinging (the power) does have a certain amount of sfx that cannot be removed. It does not allow movement along ALL surfaces. Take water for an example.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Magnetism.

 

 

Must always retain sense of humour

[Markdoc]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Must always retain sense of humour

 

Animal magnetism, then

 

After having though it about it overnight, I probably wouldn't allow targetting of specific body parts. To avoid problems over interpretation, I'd prefer to agree that you are making the "target" sticky - so you could affect (for example) a focus (that's a seperate entity) - but not someone's eyelids.

 

Anyway, thanks for the discussion - it was interesting to play around with the ideas.

 

cheers, Mark

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Must always retain sense of humour

 

I'm not trying to be funny in this case Sean. You appear to be stuck* on a specific idea about how it should work and several of us are showing you alternatives.

 

Have you ever played with a group of magnets?

 

Take a group already stuck together (say 5 or 6) of roughly the same size and shape and you can manipulate them around each other with no problem. However, if you stick the whole mass of them to a metal surface it is far more difficult to remove the whole group than it is to move an individual piece along the surface of the others (the equivalent of moving limbs in your example).

 

*now that was supposed to be funny

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

I'm not trying to be funny in this case Sean. You appear to be stuck* on a specific idea about how it should work and several of us are showing you alternatives.

 

Have you ever played with a group of magnets?

 

Take a group already stuck together (say 5 or 6) of roughly the same size and shape and you can manipulate them around each other with no problem. However, if you stick the whole mass of them to a metal surface it is far more difficult to remove the whole group than it is to move an individual piece along the surface of the others (the equivalent of moving limbs in your example).

 

*now that was supposed to be funny

 

Sorry, mate, I immediately thought of 'Magneto-ism' - the ability to do whatever the plot requires with your powers. Like stop a lead bullet. This also includes the ability to have your powers rendered ineffective whenever the plot demands. Swings and roundabouts.

 

Anyway, like I said, I've raised my concerns, and I'm sure anyone taking this power (who has read the thread) will give the issue the consideration it deserves.

 

Which can be taken two ways

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Climbatron Window Climbing Robot

 

Robot goes vertical

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

But it can. It can stick a 1billion kg object to the road. I'm effecting the road not the object. I can only effect a normal human sized section of road.

 

 

 

What Clinging does not do is act as an ACTIVE MOVEMENT STOPPING power. What it does do is act as a PASSIVE MOVEMENT IMPROVING and a PASSIVE LIFTING RESISTANCE power.

 

Again, attaching UAA to a Power isn't supposed to change the MECHANIC, it just applies it to someone else.

 

Giving Clinging to the ground allows the ground to move on surfaces it wouldn't normally be allowed to (with its movement of 0, a moot point), and to resist being pulled off of the surface it is attached to (which is itself). This is what Clinging does, mechanically. UAA does not magically turn it into a super-Entangle affecting everyone moving across the affected area.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

a. What example of UAA Desolidification are you referring to? I'm not attempting to argue that such a power wouldn't be imbalancing. I'm just saying it's possible to build legally by the rules.

 

The one in the actual rules text regarding Usable As Attack under Control The Target, third paragraph.

 

 

b. This forum since the power in question is a holdover from the 1st edition of the rules.

 

c. from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cling

 

cling1 /klɪŋ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kling] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, clung, cling·ing, noun

–verb (used without object)

1. to adhere closely; stick to: The wet paper clings to the glass.

2. to hold tight, as by grasping or embracing; cleave: The children clung to each other in the dark.

3. to be or remain close: The child clung to her mother's side.

4. to remain attached, as to an idea, hope, memory, etc.: Despite the predictions, the candidate clung to the belief that he would be elected.

5. to cohere.

 

Stickiness is not a special effect. It's part of the definition of clinging.

By that logic, I guess all Force Fields must be force based, and all Energy Blasts must be energy based. I mean, it's right there in the name, right? All Absorption effects must literally involve absorbing something. All Armor effects must be actual armor. etc etc. Oh wait, that's not actually true.

 

Like many powers in the HERO System, Clinging is poorly named to include a SFX in the name. However, the name of a Power has no game effect. The game effect is all that text underneath the title. Any SFX that can justify the mechanic is valid. Arguing the mechanics from a particular SFX is backwards. It is a reason from effect system, not a reason from mechanic system. The mechanics do what they do, the SFX justifies it, not the other way around.

 

 

Clinging (the power) does have a certain amount of sfx that cannot be removed.

I disagree with this; all Powers have multiple valid SFX, no power should have a required SFX.

 

 

It does not allow movement along ALL surfaces. Take water for an example.

Non sequitir, what? The argument at hand isn't what surfaces clinging allows you to move across, its whether UAA turns it into an Entangle like effect.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

I'm going to attempt to step away from the rules argument merry go round on this for a moment...

 

The following are my thoughts on the power Clinging and the HERO System.

 

Clinging was included in the original Champions rules because the designers wanted there to be an easy way for players to build their own versions of Spider-Man. At the time nothing like the current rules for UBO/UAA had been created yet and TK was costed differently than it is today.

 

Although no alternative construction method has ever been published, Clinging behaves more like a HERO Talent than a HERO Power. Treating it as such would have negated the need for this thread. Player to GM "I want my character to have the ability to make others stick to surfaces. Can I use Clinging with UAA?" GM to Player "No, since Clinging is a Talent and built with Power X and Advantage Z you should start with those abilities instead."

 

Why didn't Steve Long remove Clinging from the Powers list like he did for Instant Change and Regeneration? He probably decided that it wasn't worth the time and effort to figure out how to build it via other Powers like TK since it is so infrequently used and would cause as much or more clamor for the 'old method' that the current rules for Regeneration and Instant Change do.

 

I hear the common sense vs. mechanics argument all the time. I think the history of a power needs to be included as part of the common sense part as well.

 

rant off.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Yah, this thread is going nowhere. I've got better things to do as well. Happy Holidays!

[Checkmate]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

What Clinging does not do is act as an ACTIVE MOVEMENT STOPPING power. What it does do is act as a PASSIVE MOVEMENT IMPROVING and a PASSIVE LIFTING RESISTANCE power.

 

Again, attaching UAA to a Power isn't supposed to change the MECHANIC, it just applies it to someone else.

 

Giving Clinging to the ground allows the ground to move on surfaces it wouldn't normally be allowed to (with its movement of 0, a moot point), and to resist being pulled off of the surface it is attached to (which is itself). This is what Clinging does, mechanically. UAA does not magically turn it into a super-Entangle affecting everyone moving across the affected area.

Okay so I want to make "The Blob" from the X-Men comics, how would I do it? I would buy clinging Only to resist KB/resist being moved.

 

Clinging has 2 functions: 1 Movement, 2 Keep from being moved. part of the MECHANIC of clinging is being able to NOT be pulled off of something. So giving the ground clinging isn't changing ANY mechanic, it's just using part of the power, the non-movement part.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Okay so I want to make "The Blob" from the X-Men comics, how would I do it? I would buy clinging Only to resist KB/resist being moved.

 

Clinging has 2 functions: 1 Movement, 2 Keep from being moved. part of the MECHANIC of clinging is being able to NOT be pulled off of something. So giving the ground clinging isn't changing ANY mechanic, it's just using part of the power, the non-movement part.

 

Really?

 

Not being able to be pulled off is movement?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Okay so I want to make "The Blob" from the X-Men comics' date=' how would I do it? I would buy clinging Only to resist KB/resist being moved. [/quote']

Clinging would serve the purpose for the Blob to root to the ground. What Clinging does when used directly isnt the topic of discussion; rather it is about how Clinging plus UAA works.

Clinging has 2 functions: 1 Movement, 2 Keep from being moved. part of the MECHANIC of clinging is being able to NOT be pulled off of something.

 

What Clinging does not do is act as an ACTIVE MOVEMENT STOPPING power. What it does do is act as a PASSIVE MOVEMENT IMPROVING and a PASSIVE LIFTING RESISTANCE power.

 

 

So giving the ground clinging isn't changing ANY mechanic, it's just using part of the power, the non-movement part.

 

You are inverting. If Clinging gives the person w/ Clinging the ability to resist being pulled off the surface they are attached to, then giving Clinging to someone else would give them the ability to resist being pulled off the surface they are attached to. Following the same logic giving Clinging to a surface gives it the ability to resist being pulled off the surface it is attached to...which makes no sense as it is in fact an immobile surface to begin with.

 

Again, as I said previously, a GM could allow somethings utilizing Clinging UAA in this fashionand just say "this is how it works", but I wouldn't.

[Checkmate]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Following the same logic giving Clinging to a surface gives it the ability to resist being pulled off the surface it is attached to...which makes no sense as it is in fact an immobile surface to begin with.

Why doesn't it make sense? The surface the ground is attached to is the victim's foot. No matter how you do it, you have two surfaces that must be pulled apart.

Again' date=' as I said previously, a GM could allow somethings utilizing Clinging UAA in this fashionand just say "this is how it works", but I wouldn't.[/quote']

Of course everything is up to the individual GM, but this would be a pretty boring forum if all anyone ever replied with is "Eh depends on the GM"

Really?

 

Not being able to be pulled off is movement?

I think you've misunderstood me, or I'm misunderstanding your question.

 

My stance is there are two elements to the Clinging Power:

 

The first element is Movement based. It allows you to move on surfaces as if they were level ground.

 

The second element has nothing to do with movement. It is simply the ability to keep from getting pulled off a surface.

 

What I propose is you give the ground (or whatever surface your victim is on) the Clinging power to cling to the victim's foot (or whatever part of the victim is touching the surface). Essentially the ground clings to the foot, in order to pull the ground away from the foot (or raise your foot) it's a STR vs STR contest, with the opposed STR's being the owner of the foot vs. the STR you bought for the clinging power.

 

Now as far as "Would I allow this as a GM" I'm not sure. It doesn't seem terribly unbalancing. I'm also just throwing this out there for fun, I don't want anyone to get annoyed or take it too seriously.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

What's confusing me (currently) about this discussion is that no where in the description does it say you can't move while exerting clinging to resist being pulled from a surface. If the word immobile appeared in the text I could maybe see where people were coming from.

Can't leave a surface; sure.

Can't move along a surface; nothing in the clinging text to support it.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Why doesn't it make sense? The surface the ground is attached to is the victim's foot. No matter how you do it' date=' you have two surfaces that must be pulled apart.[/quote']

 

If you like; obviously I don't agree. I think such an effect would be better represented by Change Environment with penalties to Running and Leaping.

 

 

Of course everything is up to the individual GM, but this would be a pretty boring forum if all anyone ever replied with is "Eh depends on the GM"

Everything is subject to interpretation of course, but some things are explicitly allowed or disallowed while others are ambiguous.

 

In this case, we have a power (Clinging) that has a fairly well understood behavior somewhere between limited STR and surface flight that models a shtick found in comics and less commonly some other genres. It's a low priced ability that provides a circumstantial benefit of a limited use. It's kind of an odd duck mechanically, but it models what it is intended for well enough and getting rid of it in favor of limited flight and limited STR might be more consistent and easier to integrate, but would be much uglier in build. So, ok, retain it, no problems.

 

Then someone comes along and wants to turn it into an attack that functions like a 0 END Constant super-entangle that can't be broken out of. The UAA rules themselves don't support such a root mechanical alteration, and the over all effect is unbalanced. It also, IMO, fails the "fun" test -- unbreakable effects with only a narrow all-or-nothing defense are not fun to be on the receiving end of. Entangles are disliked as it is, and at least they can be "defeated". This idea of Clinging UAA as movement inhibitor is much worse for any character that lacks the "common defense" required by a UAA attack.

 

Sure, I can think of a few effects for Clinging UAA as fly paper effect that would be effective. However, that doesn't mean its a valid idea either from a mechanical perspective regarding the base effect plus UAA or from a points to effect balance perspective compared to other Powers that are actually explicitly supposed to be able to inhibit movement, or from a game play perspective regarding how events would transpire if it were used. To my mind it fails all three tests and thus isn't something I would allow *.

 

Obviously other GM's mileage may vary. So long as I never have to play in their campaigns, it doesn't affect me in the slightest

 

 

* (Other uses of Clinging UAA that were not intended to overlap Entangle would be another matter.)

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

What's confusing me (currently) about this discussion is that no where in the description does it say you can't move while exerting clinging to resist being pulled from a surface. If the word immobile appeared in the text I could maybe see where people were coming from.

Can't leave a surface; sure.

Can't move along a surface; nothing in the clinging text to support it.

 

Yep.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Why doesn't it make sense? The surface the ground is attached to is the victim's foot. No matter how you do it' date=' you have two surfaces that must be pulled apart.[/quote']

 

This is my problem, I suppose: you can't assume that every power, even if UAA, can necessarily be used offensively. I am of the view that there is nothing in the description which indicates that any adhesion or attachment to a surface prevents anyyhting other than removal from that surface.

 

Let us take a different approach: If you COULD 'cling' an opponent's feet to a surface, so that he can not move them, he becemes immobilised. Sure he can sway from side to side, a bit, but that has to have a really substantial effect on his ability to operate in combat, doesn't it?

 

So, if the power is as you suggest: the ability to prevent movement from a certain spot, at all, then it is not enough to build UAA clinging and have done: you should also be building the rest of the power: the negative DCV skill levels, for instance.

 

If you adopt the approach that the power prevents you leaving a surface but not moveing on it, that is not necessary. I'm still confused as to how either version (at least on its open) can be presented as a coherent sfx/build (the magnets stick together, even if they can slide over each other resonably freely). I'm just not convinced that UAA works with clinging.

 

Of course everything is up to the individual GM' date=' but this would be a pretty boring forum if all anyone ever replied with is "Eh depends on the GM"[/quote']

 

I quite agree; we all know that the players and GM in an individual game can do what they like, but sometimes we include the stock phrase as a social nicety rather than because we actually think they SHOULD go off on one

 

I think you've misunderstood me, or I'm misunderstanding your question.

 

My stance is there are two elements to the Clinging Power:

 

The first element is Movement based. It allows you to move on surfaces as if they were level ground.

 

The second element has nothing to do with movement. It is simply the ability to keep from getting pulled off a surface.

 

What I propose is you give the ground (or whatever surface your victim is on) the Clinging power to cling to the victim's foot (or whatever part of the victim is touching the surface). Essentially the ground clings to the foot, in order to pull the ground away from the foot (or raise your foot) it's a STR vs STR contest, with the opposed STR's being the owner of the foot vs. the STR you bought for the clinging power.

 

Now as far as "Would I allow this as a GM" I'm not sure. It doesn't seem terribly unbalancing. I'm also just throwing this out there for fun, I don't want anyone to get annoyed or take it too seriously.

 

OK, I do get this; if I misunderstood you I assure you it was entirely deliberate.

 

The cunning innovation is that the ground has the power and that means that the true target, the enemy, can't move away from that bit of ground.

 

Innovative, but flawed, if I may say so.

 

Although the construction of the rationalisation in this wise allows for the effect you are shooting for, to say that the ground is the target is an exercise in semantics. it would mean, for instance, that no matter how crumbly the ground (I mentioned sand above) you could only seperate the enemy from it by damaging the enemy: the ground could NOT be damaged by the application of the power, or by force used to seperate the two.

 

Whilst that sounds even better from a certain 'Wizard of Oz' point of view, I have to say it is just having a laugh.

[Checkmate]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

What's confusing me (currently) about this discussion is that no where in the description does it say you can't move while exerting clinging to resist being pulled from a surface. If the word immobile appeared in the text I could maybe see where people were coming from.

Can't leave a surface; sure.

Can't move along a surface; nothing in the clinging text to support it.

But with my way, the "character" with the clinging power (the ground) can't move anyway.

 

Let me try it this way: Let's say you have the Clinging Power and your arm is absolutely immovable, you decide to cling to the keyboard. Your roommate comes up and tries to grab the keyboard away from you. The way you describe things, the keyboard would slide right off your hand, since clinging doesn't hinder movement. I think we both agree, that's not how it works. You're roommate would have to STR vs STR against your clinging to remove the keyboard.

 

Now using that picture, the keyboard is your roommate's foot, and the ground is your immovable hand. Does that make sense?

 

As far as sand, well that's just a case of applying limits to certain SFX. Along the lines of some GM's allowing an Electrical EB'er to throw a couple more dice if the defender is in water.

 

Now if we're discussing whether this power is balanced and usable, I'd have to think on that more, but from the rules, it would appear legal.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

In order for that to work the inanimate object (The ground) would have to be of approximately human mass unless you purchased it to effect greater mass. The ground's mass is considerable, and since your build is focused very much on things that are technically legal we can't really handwave being able to effect a section of an object in this instance.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Is there any non munchkin reason why anyone would not want to this as

 

Vander-Magnetic-Web-Static Stickiness: Entangle, AOE 1 Hex (+1/2), Takes no Damage From Attacks (+1/2), Set Effect [Cannot Move, 1/2 DCV, Can use Foci] (-1), Entangle Cannot have More Def/Body than Surface Attacked to (-1/2).

 

Seems to cover the effect desired without the irritating rules questions.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Is there any non munchkin reason why anyone would not want to this as

 

Vander-Magnetic-Web-Static Stickiness: Entangle, AOE 1 Hex (+1/2), Takes no Damage From Attacks (+1/2), Set Effect [Cannot Move, 1/2 DCV, Can use Foci] (-1), Entangle Cannot have More Def/Body than Surface Attacked to (-1/2).

 

Seems to cover the effect desired without the irritating rules questions.

 

You'd need to add Constant to that to affect people entering the hex over time, but other than that...

 

Here's a few ways to do it:

 

Fly Paper: CE 4" radius, -10" of Running, -6" of Leaping, Long-Lasting 20 Minutes, Multiple Combat Effects (70 Active Points); Two-Dimensional (-1/4); END: 7; Real Cost: 56

 

Fly Paper: Entangle 6d6, 3 DEF, Costs END Only To Activate (+1/4), Takes No Damage From Attacks All Attacks (+1/2), Uncontrolled (Lasts 1d3 Turns) (+1/2), AOE (15" Radius; +1), Two-Dimensional (-1/4), Continuous (+1) (180 Active Points); Does Not Prevent The Use Of Accessible Foci (-1), Set Effect (Hands Only/Feet Only) (-1), Cannot Form Barriers (-1/4), Nonresistant DEF (-1/4); END: 17; Real Cost: 51

 

Fly Paper: TK (25 STR), Costs END Only To Activate (+1/4), Uncontrolled (Lasts 1d3 Turns) (+1/2), AOE (7" Radius; +1) (103 Active Points); Only To Attach Items / People In Area To Affected Surface (-1/2), Affects Whole Object (-1/4), May Only Target A Contiguous Plane / Surface Area (-1/4); END: 8; Real Cost: 54

 

 

Personally, I think the Change Environment approach is the cleanest build for the "make a surface like fly paper" effect since it already affects an area and already has a mechanism for making it long lasting, thus avoiding the need for Uncontrolled and defining some arbitrary limit on how long it will last.

 

 

In the interests of fairness here is a Clinging UAA base version, assuming that the Clinging UAA = Immobilizing effect (which I don't agree with):

 

Fly Paper: Clinging (50 STR), Uncontrolled (Lasts 1d3 Turns) (+1/2), AOE (6" Radius; +1), Two-Dimensional (-1/4), UAA (+1) (75 Active Points); Only To Attach Items / People In Area To Affected Surface (-1/4), Only To Target A Contiguous Plane / Surface Area To Affect Items / People Touching That Surface Area (-1/4); END 0; Real Cost: 50

 

Note that the effect is both the cheapest and the strongest of all 4 competing powers; it also costs no END. I couldn't personally think of a valid "common defense" for the UAA that made any sense and that would serve to weaken it, but this does not seem like a balanced effect to me, even assuming I allowed UAA to invert the base mechanic in this fashion.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

But with my way, the "character" with the clinging power (the ground) can't move anyway.

 

Let me try it this way: Let's say you have the Clinging Power and your arm is absolutely immovable, you decide to cling to the keyboard. Your roommate comes up and tries to grab the keyboard away from you. The way you describe things, the keyboard would slide right off your hand, since clinging doesn't hinder movement. I think we both agree, that's not how it works. You're roommate would have to STR vs STR against your clinging to remove the keyboard.

 

Now using that picture, the keyboard is your roommate's foot, and the ground is your immovable hand. Does that make sense?

 

As far as sand, well that's just a case of applying limits to certain SFX. Along the lines of some GM's allowing an Electrical EB'er to throw a couple more dice if the defender is in water.

 

Now if we're discussing whether this power is balanced and usable, I'd have to think on that more, but from the rules, it would appear legal.

 

I understand what you are suggesting, I do, but it is just a shocking abuse of the whole concept of UAA. Shocking

 

In the example you give the keyboard and the hand would remain attached, but they would move freely in relation to each other. Pretty sure that is what i (and others supporting this side of the argument) have been sugegsting.

 

Your 'the ground is the target' requires, by your own admission if I am reading this right, a specific limitation to circumvent the horriible abuse that it would otherwise engender. I really can't see how that would ever be a good idea.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Fly Paper: Entangle 6d6' date=' 3 DEF, Costs END Only To Activate (+1/4), Takes No Damage From Attacks All Attacks (+1/2), Uncontrolled (Lasts 1d3 Turns) (+1/2), AOE (15" Radius; +1), Two-Dimensional (-1/4), Continuous (+1) (180 Active Points); Does Not Prevent The Use Of Accessible Foci (-1), Set Effect (Hands Only/Feet Only) (-1), Cannot Form Barriers (-1/4), Nonresistant DEF (-1/4); END: 17; Real Cost: 51 [/quote']

 

Can you take both Set Effect and Does Not Prevent the use of Accessible Foci (and Cannot for Barriers for that matter)? I always thought they were redundant.

 

Personally, I think the Change Environment approach is the cleanest build for the "make a surface like fly paper" effect since it already affects an area and already has a mechanism for making it long lasting, thus avoiding the need for Uncontrolled and defining some arbitrary limit on how long it will last.

 

Ever since they took away using CE for flashlights, I almost never remember they can be used for things other than weather control.

I think you're right, it is the cleanest approach for this effect.

[Checkmate]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

In order for that to work the inanimate object (The ground) would have to be of approximately human mass unless you purchased it to effect greater mass. The ground's mass is considerable' date=' and since your build is focused very much on things that are technically legal we can't really handwave being able to effect a section of an object in this instance.[/quote']

Not exactly. It would only effect human mass of the object. Since you're feet would fit into a human sized object, we're okay there. The same applies to Invisibility UAA. Let's say you want to see what's on the other side of a wall. You could use your Invisibility to make a human sized portion of the wall Invisible so you could look though it. I'm only making a human sized portion of the wall have clinging.

 

In the example you give the keyboard and the hand would remain attached' date=' but they would move freely in relation to each other. Pretty sure that is what i (and others supporting this side of the argument) have been sugegsting.[/quote']

So If I understand you correctly, Let's pretend that I've decided to cling to the very right edge of my keyboard (and again my arm is completely un-movable). My roommate comes up and grabs the right edge and pulls it, my hand would slide to the left edge of the keyboard even if I didn't want it to? My roommate could slide my hand all around the keyboard and wouldn't be forced to STR vs STR unless he tries to take the keyboard completely away? That doesn't make sense, because if that were true how could clinging resist KB? You'd just slide along the ground/wall/celling.

 

I'm not adding an limitation to the Clinging power, I'm just giving the exact same power Clinging, as it is written in the book, to the ground. As per the book clinging allows you to cling to a surface. If anyone tries to remove you from that surface it's a STR vs STR. The surface the human sized portion of the ground is clinging to, is your foot.