Clinging, UAA

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Not exactly. It would only effect human mass of the object. Since you're feet would fit into a human sized object' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

A gamemaster might allow that but that's operating outside of the way UAA is defined by the rules. I can't teleport part of an object away if I have Teleport UAA.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

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.

 

Handcuffs have all three (sidebar p168); that's good enough precedent for me.

 

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.

Change Environment is a wonderful thing. If only it could also grant beneficial effects it would be perfect.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Handcuffs have all three (sidebar p168); that's good enough precedent for me.

 

Wow you're right, my characters must have been buying their handcuffs from Williams-Sonoma all these years.

 

This is as embarrasing as not realizing that half moves no longer caused a -1 OCV penalty.

[Utech]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Let's say you have the Clinging Power and your arm is absolutely immovable' date=' you decide to cling to the keyboard.[/quote']

 

I would have to say, "Sorry, you can't use Clinging to do that."

 

The Clinging power is not meant to be used to hold on to things. It provides no special ability to hold on to keyboards, guns, OAF or anything else if someone tries to take that thing away from you.

 

Likewise, you could not use Clinging to keep your eyes shut, keep your fingers grasped tightly about a coin, keep your hair in place, or keep your pants from falling down when someone steals your utility belt.

 

Clinging just isn't meant to do that sort of thing whether bought straight up or as UAA.

[Checkmate]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

I would have to say, "Sorry, you can't use Clinging to do that."

 

The Clinging power is not meant to be used to hold on to things. It provides no special ability to hold on to keyboards, guns, OAF or anything else if someone tries to take that thing away from you.

 

Likewise, you could not use Clinging to keep your eyes shut, keep your fingers grasped tightly about a coin, keep your hair in place, or keep your pants from falling down when someone steals your utility belt.

 

Clinging just isn't meant to do that sort of thing whether bought straight up or as UAA.

I disagree. In the Ultimate Martial Artist one of the special abilities of Tai Ch'i Ch'uan: Push Hands

...Skilled practitioners become so good at this they can effectively "stick" to an opponent and maintain contact with him no matter what he does to shake them off...Characters can buy this with Clinging with the limitations Only To Stick To An Opponent (-1) and Cannot Resist Knockback (-1/4)

The fact that Clinging can resist KB means the character has to be stuck on the surface. If I'm clinging to a wall you can't just push me around the wall as if I were on ice. If an attack that does KB hits me, I don't slide along the surface, I stick there. Even from the Clinging power description in the 5th ER:

While Clinging, a character can use his full STR to "stick" to the surface

Even more convincing is the quote from the clinging power:

...if two characters are stuck together with Clinging, and someone pulls them apart, the character being clung to does not take damage

Now I'm not arguing whether this would be abusive or not, that's up to GM's to decide, what I am saying though, is that my approach would appear to be a "legal" use of Clinging.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

The fact that Clinging can resist KB means the character has to be stuck on the surface. If I'm clinging to a wall you can't just push me around the wall as if I were on ice. If an attack that does KB hits me' date=' I don't slide along the surface, I stick there.[/quote']

 

Once again, no where in the clinging power does it say you can't resist knockback or use the clinging's STR to stick while moving, there's no 'you are immobile' effect inherent to clinging.

 

And UAA itself has no component that allows you to effect part of an object. When targeting an innanimate object you must be able to effect the entirety of its mass.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

I disagree. In the Ultimate Martial Artist one of the special abilities of Tai Ch'i Ch'uan: Push Hands

Which still doesn't cause immobility or an Entangle like effect. The affected person can still move freely.

The fact that Clinging can resist KB means the character has to be stuck on the surface. If I'm clinging to a wall you can't just push me around the wall as if I were on ice. If an attack that does KB hits me, I don't slide along the surface, I stick there. Even from the Clinging power description in the 5th ER:

No one is arguing that Clinging doesn't resist KB. The argument is whether it causes immobility, and whether such an aspect would be usable offensively.

Even more convincing is the quote from the clinging power:

 

Now I'm not arguing whether this would be abusive or not, that's up to GM's to decide, what I am saying though, is that my approach would appear to be a "legal" use of Clinging.

The argument isnt if you can use Clinging UAA -- it's in the rules under Advantages and Adders in the Clinging write up itself. The question is, what effect does that have.

 

And the only thing the "take no damage" sentence is convincing of to me is that Clinging has no ability to cause damage.

[Checkmate]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Which still doesn't cause immobility or an Entangle like effect. The affected person can still move freely.

Right, as long as I don't stop moving. If I do, then he has to either move me, or unstick my hand. If I were somehow frozen and no one could move me and I used clinging to cling to someone, they ain't movin' until they do a STR vs my clinging STR to remove my hand.

 

No one is arguing that Clinging doesn't resist KB. The argument is whether it causes immobility' date=' and whether such an aspect would be usable offensively.[/quote']

If clinging didn't hinder movement, why would it reduce KB? KB is a form of movement after all.

 

The argument isnt if you can use Clinging UAA -- it's in the rules under Advantages and Adders in the Clinging write up itself. The question is' date=' what effect does that have.[/quote']

It stops movement. That was the intention. The only real question about my way is whether UAA can effect part of an object. I know I've seen it before, but can't seem to find it.

 

And the only thing the "take no damage" sentence is convincing of to me is that Clinging has no ability to cause damage.

It proves you can stick to another person. I don't want to play word games here but it says "stick", that seems to strongly imply you're stuck to another person.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

It stops movement. That was the intention. The only real question about my way is whether UAA can effect part of an object. I know I've seen it before' date=' but can't seem to find it.[/quote']

 

It mitigates a damage effect. It doesn't stop movement and nothing in the power description indicates that that was clinging's intention. Nor should you be argueing what the power's intention was. If you were going with intention and spirit rather than letter, we'd have settled on Entangle, TK or Change Environment 7 pages ago.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Once again, no where in the clinging power does it say you can't resist knockback or use the clinging's STR to stick while moving, there's no 'you are immobile' effect inherent to clinging.

...

 

There's no inherent 'you are immobile' effect to Flight but add UAA and it can be used to keep a non-flyer from using other forms of movement just by holding them 1" off the ground. What is being suggested for Clinging UAA is not that different.

 

I have never suggested that an affected character wouldn't be able to move their arms, use any foci or lose any DCV. They just cant move their feet or equivalent without breaking the effect.

 

Several builds have shown that a similar effect can be accomplished with a complex Entangle build. However, a big difference is that Entangle is fire-and-forget and Clinging UAA would not be. It would require at least eye contact to maintain. If the owner of the power is Stunned or KO'ed the effect would immediately end.

 

The only compelling argument I have really seen against this has been the 0 END cost. I think the same thing would also happen if someone introduced Armor UBO as well. A possible solution would be to house-rule that UBO/UAA automatically adds a -0 Costs END Limitation when used on powers that are inherently 0 END.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

The only compelling argument I have really seen against this has been the 0 END cost. I think the same thing would also happen if someone introduced Armor UBO as well. A possible solution would be to house-rule that UBO/UAA automatically adds a -0 Costs END Limitation when used on powers that are inherently 0 END.

 

Sorta like how Damage Shield automatically gives -0 No Range. I think that could be a good idea.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Right, as long as I don't stop moving. If I do, then he has to either move me, or unstick my hand. If I were somehow frozen and no one could move me and I used clinging to cling to someone, they ain't movin' until they do a STR vs my clinging STR to remove my hand.

The write up indicates no such thing.

 

"Skilled practitioners become so good at this that they can effectively "stick" to an opponent and maintain contact with him no matter what he does to shake them off (even running, leaping, and acrobatics do not help escape). Characters can buy this as Clinging (up to the maximum STR of the character's Shove manuever) with the Limitations "Only To Stick To An Opponent (-1) and Cannot Resist Knockback (-1/4)."

 

It clearly says that it allows the character to move with the target; it does not say that the target's movement is hindered in any way or that the clinging character can root in place and thus trap the target.

 

IMO this is a classic example if inch -> mile thinking. An ability that is supposed to model an effect that is largely just flavorful (move with another character) that a powergamer then tries to twist into a unfair combat advantage (root that character in place against their will).

 

Also, and again, this is yet another example that deviates from the Clinging + UAA discussion actually at hand.

 

 

If clinging didn't hinder movement, why would it reduce KB? KB is a form of movement after all.

 

Actually in game terms KB isn't Movement, its an Optional Effect of Damage. Clinging offers some protection from it, 6 character points worth on average, but this is less a function of Clinging and more a function of how Knockback interacts with other game and environmental effects including Clinging, Martial Arts, Flight, Gliding, gravity, the combat maneuver Roll with Punch, or being underwater, falling, or in mid leap.

 

As to resisting KB equating to "hindering movement", you can also use raw STR to resist KB, and Flight too, yet I don't think you'd find much support for the idea that they are thus at root "movement hindering abilities". By the same logic, Killing Attacks are movement hindering powers because they inflict less KB. Trying to say "Clinging Resists KB, therefore it hinders movement, and therefore if I apply UAA to it I make a super Entangle!" is a very very weak argument.

 

It stops movement. That was the intention. The only real question about my way is whether UAA can effect part of an object. I know I've seen it before, but can't seem to find it.

It does not stop Movement against a characters will. It allows people to move across surfaces they wouldn't normally be able to and to resist being pulled off the surface against their will. It is not an offensive Entangle like effect.

 

It proves you can stick to another person. I don't want to play word games here but it says "stick", that seems to strongly imply you're stuck to another person.

And this immobilizes them how? This damages them how? This refutes my point how? If you have a logical basis for Clinging = Super Entangle, pull the trigger on it already; this is getting tiresome.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

There's no inherent 'you are immobile' effect to Flight but add UAA and it can be used to keep a non-flyer from using other forms of movement just by holding them 1" off the ground. What is being suggested for Clinging UAA is not that different.

 

Inherent in Running is contact with the ground, 1" of flight removes that contact and thus renders Running unusable. Clinging in no way indicates that it negates movement or any prerequisite for movement.

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Several builds have shown that a similar effect can be accomplished with a complex Entangle build. However' date=' a big difference is that Entangle is fire-and-forget and Clinging UAA would not be. It would require at least eye contact to maintain. If the owner of the power is Stunned or KO'ed the effect would immediately end.[/quote']

 

Both Change Environment or TK are not complicated, they cover your concern for end use and have the advantage of actually working.

[Checkmate]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

And this immobilizes them how? This damages them how? This refutes my point how? If you have a logical basis for Clinging = Super Entangle, pull the trigger on it already; this is getting tiresome.

Forget the UMA, look in the Clinging write which expressly states you can "Stick" to another person. If I am Cling to another person and don't move, and that person can't move me, what happens?

 

As far as KB not being movement, now who's playing word games? What happens when you get knocked back do you or do you not move? Does clinging help or hinder that movement? Hmm.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

As far as KB not being movement' date=' now who's playing word games? What happens when you get knocked back do you or do you not move? Does clinging help or hinder that movement? Hmm.[/quote']

 

To play the semantics game fully, perhaps Clinging UAA should only impede INVOLUNTARY movement which is caused by an outside force. That's what Knockback is, right?

 

EDIT: And to the extent it does decease movement, it should only decrease it by 1d6", regardless of the STR of the Clinging, since that's all it would reduce the Knockback by, correct?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Forget the UMA, look in the Clinging write which expressly states you can "Stick" to another person. If I am Cling to another person and don't move, and that person can't move me, what happens?

 

As far as KB not being movement, now who's playing word games? What happens when you get knocked back do you or do you not move? Does clinging help or hinder that movement? Hmm.

 

There is a difference between movement and Movement. One is a concept, the other is a Game Effect.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

I'll self moderate here a bit and apologize for my tone earlier; I definitely shouldn't post while irritated about other things.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

There's no inherent 'you are immobile' effect to Flight but add UAA and it can be used to keep a non-flyer from using other forms of movement just by holding them 1" off the ground. What is being suggested for Clinging UAA is not that different.

 

I have never suggested that an affected character wouldn't be able to move their arms, use any foci or lose any DCV. They just cant move their feet or equivalent without breaking the effect.

 

Several builds have shown that a similar effect can be accomplished with a complex Entangle build. However, a big difference is that Entangle is fire-and-forget and Clinging UAA would not be. It would require at least eye contact to maintain. If the owner of the power is Stunned or KO'ed the effect would immediately end.

 

The only compelling argument I have really seen against this has been the 0 END cost. I think the same thing would also happen if someone introduced Armor UBO as well. A possible solution would be to house-rule that UBO/UAA automatically adds a -0 Costs END Limitation when used on powers that are inherently 0 END.

 

 

....other forms of movement that require contact with the ground. That is a limitation of certain types of movement, not an 'ability' of UAA flight. If you have flight, then the UAA flight might be able to counter siome or all of it, but only be actually moving you back to where you started. A GM may determine that, rather than move there then move back you subtract one from the other so, if UAA flight is big enough, you are held in place, just for the sake of simplicity, but I don't think that is how it actually works. Of course if you have teleport, it would not make much sense that they cancel, so you'd be back to the move/move back thing.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Well, we have a definitive opinion from Steve, which does not surprise me, but also does not change my opinion.

 

Personally I come back to the stuff from the start of the thread: 70 STR 'holds' are game breaking.

 

Moreover, I'm still fascinated to know how you can have someone who cannot move (well, whose feet are stuck to the floor) and yet whose DCV is unaffected.

 

It is all well and good saying 'yes you can build it' but I believe it is genuinely damaging to the system to have these sort of meta-game constructs (because, Hyper Man's 'magnetics' notwithstanding, I still have not seen a convincing sfx for the build) in-game.

 

I keep on saying I'm going: it looks like I have nowhere now to leave

[Markdoc]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

Well, we have a definitive opinion from Steve, which does not surprise me, but also does not change my opinion.

 

Personally I come back to the stuff from the start of the thread: 70 STR 'holds' are game breaking.

 

Not really. It's only an issue if:

 

a) you're using AP caps

the character is "stuck" to something they can't break

c) the character can't meaningfully react from where they are (ie: they have no ranged attacks)

d) they can't use the built-in option to turn off the UAA.

 

and

e) the attacking character can afford to use his actions holding the target in place - for example if he has other comrades to attack.

 

Now there are going to be cases where one or more of those conditions are met, in which case it could be an effective attack. There are going to be plenty where it isn't. Having actually used this attack in a game, I safely say that in most ways it's far weaker than an entangle of equivalent AP, simply because it's not continuous/uncontrollable (which entangle essentially is, by default) and it does not actively impair the target. It simply sticks him in place - as long as you concentrate on holding him there.

 

Basically you are trading better "stickiness" for less utility - which seems fair enough to me.

 

cheers, Mark

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

...and f), you want the power to amke any kind of sense at all.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

OK, that wasn't helpful. Here is a bit more actual substance:

 

a) you're using AP caps: yes, but this is 60 points worth: you are assuming everyone is going to have access to 70 STR. The power itself is relatively low cost.

the character is "stuck" to something they can't break: well, it depends how they are stuck: Steve has confirmed you can tack someone down as you like, or seems to ahve, so you can take advantage of the point of origin of powers to make this a reasonably common one. Moreover, if you stick the opponent to the right object, this might not be an option: villains, for instance, might like to stick heroes to civilians.

c) the character can't meaningfully react from where they are (ie: they have no ranged attacks): yes it is an absolute killer against martial artists who shoudn't be able to do full DC attacks if they can't move. Or anyone with ranged attacks who is, you know, pointing the wrong way. Pretty nasty indeed for anyone who doesn't have huge strength.

d) they can't use the built-in option to turn off the UAA. That depends very much on the build: if it is glue, it might be: Apply solvent

 

and

e) the attacking character can afford to use his actions holding the target in place - for example if he has other comrades to attack. This is a good point, but taking out one of the opposition (or more if you sweep) might be worth it. If not, you can still take advantage of the low base cost to pile on those utility advantages:

 

60 points Clinging (40 STR), Area Of Effect (One Hex; +1/2), Uncontrolled (+1/2), Usable As Attack (+1) (60 Active Points)

 

This last build also gets around the extremely arbitrary weight restriction on what you can stick together.

 

My problem is that it does not balance because it is taking advantage of the metagame effect: STR is being bought at an artificially reduced cost. Take away the cost/balance issue and you really remove a lot of the reason for having the character construction rules we have.

 

Cheers

 

Sean

[jtelson]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

I think someone's got to say it. That might be the single most insane ruling I've seen since I was a Magic:The Gathering judge (For reasons all chronicled in depth previously).

 

That being said that's the ruling and it effectively ends the discussion.

 

Cheers

 

JT

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Clinging, UAA

 

For me Steve's ruling creates more questions than it answers and also seems inconsistent with other rules (particularly the Grab rules and the UAA rules themselves).

 

I've posted my questions here; hopefully it will catch Steve in an expansive mood

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1471556#post1471556