Would this require shapeshift

[Checkmate]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

Force Field isn't Opaque... so no - you can't make yourself look like a tall Chinese Guy or whatever. SFX DENIED. drawback and possible advantages do not equal themselves out, you're trying to gain an advantage for free.

 

Shapeshift isn't an issue of opaque/transparent. It's big/small. Big Person, Small Bird. SFX ACCEPTED. The drawbacks and advantages equal themselves out, roughly. Or close enough for me.

 

not all SFX are equal, not all are acceptable. Oh Well.

So you're not even going to read my posts anymore, just look for confrontation?

[Checkmate]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

Sure' date=' except that you can't imitate anyone with this SFX, nor can you hide your identity. Both of which you could do with ShapeShift.[/quote']

Phil, I think you're misunderstanding: I'm on your side. I agree with everything you've said. I'm trying to get the reaction from the people that say they disagree with me.

[JmOz]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I find it odd that no one has mentioned the bonus to concealment that shinking gives, this seems to be something important there that I can't place...

[caris]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I find it odd that no one has mentioned the bonus to concealment that shinking gives' date=' this seems to be something important there that I can't place...[/quote']

 

I'm not sure how you see it as relevant. The bonus is inherent to the power, is presumed to be included in the base cost, and not dependent on SFX. Shape Shift does not inherently give any bonuses to Concealment, any bonuses from it would be situational given by the GM, or bought through another power like Skill Levels bought with a Limitation. Shape Shifts primary stealth/concealment function is appearing like something else (e.g. no suspects that the sofa is really a person listening in on their conversation).

[Tonio]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

Force Field isn't Opaque... so no - you can't make yourself look like a tall Chinese Guy or whatever. SFX DENIED. drawback and possible advantages do not equal themselves out, you're trying to gain an advantage for free.

 

Shapeshift isn't an issue of opaque/transparent. It's big/small. Big Person, Small Bird. SFX ACCEPTED. The drawbacks and advantages equal themselves out, roughly. Or close enough for me.

 

not all SFX are equal, not all are acceptable. Oh Well.

 

Neither Force Field nor Shape Shift nor Shrinking are Opaque (in fact, the only mention of Opaque in the whole book is regarding Force Wall). Neither includes, in its description, the power to change your shape. How is it, then, that you'll accept one as turning you into something else, but not the other?

 

Why is the change from "Person" to "Bird" accepted when it's tacked on to the change from "Big" to "Small" in Shrinking, while the change from "Human" to "Orc" (as an example) is not accepted when it's tacked on to the change from "Unarmored" to "Armored" in Force Field?

 

I'd say both should be equally valid. Either you (generic "you") allow SFXs to change your outward appearance, and if so, to what degree (believability), or you don't. Maybe both examples above are valid, only nobody would really mistake the small bird for an actual bird (just looks like a small human with bird wings and a beak), and nobody would mistake the wizard for an Orc (just looks like a human with a translucent image of an Orc around him). Or maybe neither is, and you'd need Shape Shift for the former, Images for the latter. Or maybe both are completely valid, and Shape Shift's only use would be with the Imitation Adder.

 

It just seems to me that allowing one power (Shrinking) to change your shape (when it's not included in the Power's description) while not allowing another (say, Force Field) is inconsistent, especially since there can be SFX that really DO work. For example, a Force Field (or, if you wish, nonpersistent, noninvisible Armor or PD/ED/Damage Resistance) based power called "Orcskin" which makes your skin thick and leather, like that of an Orc, which makes you look like one.

[Utech]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I'm going to try to address just the original question.

 

Would this require Shape Shift?

 

That depends. Answer this question first: Do you want your character to have any of the benefits associated with Shape Shift?

If yes: Shape Shift is required.

If no: Shape Shift is not required.

 

By making "changes into a hawk" the sfx of your Shrinking power, you will lose mass and size. People will have a hard time spotting you. You'll tend to take more Knockback.

 

By making "changes into a hawk" the sfx of your Shrinking power, you will not automatically convince anyone that you are a real hawk. You won't look, sound, or feel like a real hawk. You might, however, be able to take Skills or Talents that would allow you to disguise yourself as a hawk and imitate the sounds that real hawks make.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

So you're not even going to read my posts anymore' date=' just look for confrontation?[/quote']

 

I'm not addressing you anymore - I'm addressing Tonio. I'm ignoring your posts at the moment.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

We allow all kinds of body modifications in the name of SFX.

 

Flight; Restrainable - my arms turn into feathered wings and allow me to fly.

HKA - my feet turn into claws and allow me to attack people, handy while my arms are wings.

Shrinking - my body grows feathers and I look like a bird.

 

Combine all three and you have A Hawk.

[Tonio]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

We allow all kinds of body modifications in the name of SFX.

 

Flight; Restrainable - my arms turn into feathered wings and allow me to fly.

HKA - my feet turn into claws and allow me to attack people, handy while my arms are wings.

Shrinking - my body grows feathers and I look like a bird.

 

Combine all three and you have A Hawk.

 

Right, but in no case does the change allow for anything other than maybe a justification for DF. Having your arms turn into feathered wings doesn't give you any other ability. It doesn't let you pass as a bird, doesn't make you more difficult to spot, etc. I concur with Utech. "Turning into a hawk" is fine as an SFX for Shrinking, as long as you understand it won't fool anybody, ever, by itself. You're no more likely to fool someone into thinking you're a bird than someone who bought their Shrinking as "Turns into a breadbox" is, just by using your Shrinking power. Problem is, how, exactly, do you define the SFX to explain this? How does a person with Shrinking (SFX: turns into a haw) look different from someone with Shape Shift (into hawk)?

 

The big difference between turning as a hawk as SFX for Shrinking and having big feathered wings as SFX for Flight is that someone else looking at you will think you're something else if you look like a hawk. There's a concealment component (as someone else mentioned). Giving someone a +3 on their Disguise Skill when used to Disguise themselves as a hawk when using Shrinking defined as "turns into a hawk" is fine, it's a minor effect. Having someone actually turn into a hawk (so that no Disguise roll is needed, etc.) is a major effect, in the province of Shape Shift. I still insist SFX's of powers should not duplicate effects of other Powers.

 

Bringing up the FF/DS thing again... someone said that the SFX for the FF might make it LOOK like I have a DS, but I won't hurt anybody because I didn't buy the DS. I think I didn't make my point clear. Having "turns into a hawk" as SFX for Shrinking effectively means that your SFX for Shrinking is Shape Shifting into a hawk. Your SFX is another Power. If I can do that, what's to stop me as defining the SFX of a power (FF) as being another power (EB, DS)?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I find it odd that no one has mentioned the bonus to concealment that shinking gives' date=' this seems to be something important there that I can't place...[/quote']

 

Perhaps you overlooked it

 

Can I just clarify what we are arguing about, here? Would I let an application of superpowers prevent a secret identity being obvious?

 

Yes I would. Mind you you basically get two forms: secret ID and hero ID, and that is it. Moreover a cunning opponent might be able to work out that you are one and the same person really. You'll never be sure it is a perfect disguise. It might be something subtle, like the way yuo stand or an intonation of voice, but it is a gimme, so you can't complain.

 

Would I let an application of superpowers fool someone into think that I was a different hero, or a different secret ID?

 

No, I don't think I would. Unless the superpower was multiform, or images or shapeshift. Maybe, occasionally, as a power trick.

 

All of that is modified by the genre. In a superhero game, where no one seems to be able to spot that CK is SM, it doesn't seem out of place. In a Spy Hero game, you have to spend points to look different.

 

So, as you see, I am sitting on the fence, or possible straddling it. Several fences, in fact. In different fields. In different countries.

 

My groin hurts.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I think I didn't make my point clear. Having "turns into a hawk" as SFX for Shrinking effectively means that your SFX for Shrinking is Shape Shifting into a hawk. Your SFX is another Power. If I can do that' date=' what's to stop me as defining the SFX of a power (FF) as being another power (EB, DS)?[/quote']

 

I got your point.

 

I disagree.

 

FF: "I look like someone else" is a blatant attempt at duplicating another Power with SFX.

Shrinking: "I'm a bird" is not nearly as blatant (if at all), and is, AFAIC, an alternate method to help create various effects (like turning into a bird) to things like Multiform.

[Tonio]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

FF: "I look like someone else" is a blatant attempt at duplicating another Power with SFX.

Shrinking: "I'm a bird" is not nearly as blatant (if at all), and is, AFAIC, an alternate method to help create various effects (like turning into a bird) to things like Multiform.

 

Why? Is it because Shrinking is already changing your size, so changing shape is a short jump? Is it because you consider it less useful to look like a bird than someone else? Is it because you consider the benefits of looking like a bird to be balanced with its limitations, and not so for looking like someone else?

 

(These aren't meant to be sarcastic, facetious questions, but honest ones... sorry if it seems otherwise.)

[ghost-angel]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

The last one is closest... the potential benefits and potential drawbacks of looking like a bird essentially balance themselves out.

[Checkmate]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

The last one is closest... the potential benefits and potential drawbacks of looking like a bird essentially balance themselves out.

I realize you're ignoring my post, (although I have no idea what you could have possibly taken as offensive in my posts) but I was curious as to how LOOKING like a bird could possibly limit you.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

Looking like a bird it is going to be hard to convince a lot of people to clear the area because Grond is on the way:

 

Hawk Boy: Citizens, clear the area! Grond is on the way!

 

Citizens: Cool - a talking hawk!

 

**pause**

 

Citizens: Aaaarrrgghh! - Grond!

 

I'd say PRE attack penalties, at least. Problems with a lot of social skills*. That sort of mularkey.

 

Point is, if you get an advantage you also get a limitation.

 

 

 

 

* Except, maybe, seducing hawks.

 

 

What?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I got your point.

 

I disagree.

 

FF: "I look like someone else" is a blatant attempt at duplicating another Power with SFX.

Shrinking: "I'm a bird" is not nearly as blatant (if at all), and is, AFAIC, an alternate method to help create various effects (like turning into a bird) to things like Multiform.

 

 

 

Context is everything here. I might let someone with a FF look completely different: it might manifest as green scaly skin, and they could be quite impossible to identify. Thing is though, it all has to come down to whether the sfx make sense in context. The hawk does, to my mind.

 

This will always be a judgement call. A fire EB that gives you a limited version of LS: Cold - I could live with that. A fire EB that made you look like a tall chinaman - I'd need convincing.

[casualplayer]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I realize you're ignoring my post' date=' (although I have no idea what you could have possibly taken as offensive in my posts) but I was curious as to how LOOKING like a bird could possibly limit you.[/quote']

 

Elmer Fudd or Dick Cheney might take a shot at you.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I realize you're ignoring my post' date=' (although I have no idea what you could have possibly taken as offensive in my posts) but I was curious as to how LOOKING like a bird could possibly limit you.[/quote']

 

No offense taken. I just have a feeling we'd be talking past each other at the least.

 

I'm sure in the context of a game, the ability to look like a hawk may hinder you a bit. Flying around in some areas may get you shooed away (try it in a building.. mighty odd . . .).

 

People may noticed the hawk almost blatantly out of place in an urban campaign.

 

As Sean said, context does mean a lot.

[Tonio]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

I'm sure in the context of a game, the ability to look like a hawk may hinder you a bit. Flying around in some areas may get you shooed away (try it in a building.. mighty odd . . .).

 

People may noticed the hawk almost blatantly out of place in an urban campaign.

 

As Sean said, context does mean a lot.

 

What bothers me about this is that given this reasoning, a character should pay 0 points for the power to Shape Shift into a Hawk. I don't believe getting shooed away in some restricted settings (where you can simply go back to human form and stop from being shooed away), being noticed as out of place (where you'd either also be noticed in human form, or could avoid being noticed by going human form), and Sean's example (which I disagree with... I'd think a talking hawk would draw more attention than a regular human being) outweigh the benefits of being a hawk, unless that hawk you look like is immediately recognizable as "you" in any, or at least most settings. Otherwise, you're comparing minor inconveniences and the power to conceal your identity (stealth, concealment, etc).

[ghost-angel]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

We accept all kinds of things we pay 0 Points for in a Champions campaign to conceal your identity. Heck I've got a character that wears a blank face mask - that's it. That's what I described, nothing else attached to it.

 

And in a broader "beyond Champions" scope, concealing ones identity can be just as much a risk as a benefit, or a complete wash and an utterly useless ability. Concealing ones identity is not, in and of itself, that great a benefit.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

Elmer Fudd or Dick Cheney might take a shot at you.

 

Dick Cheney might shoot you even if you don't look like a bird

[Sean Waters]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

What bothers me about this is that given this reasoning' date=' a character should pay 0 points for the power to Shape Shift into a Hawk. I don't believe getting shooed away in some restricted settings (where you can simply go back to human form and stop from being shooed away), being noticed as out of place (where you'd either also be noticed in human form, or could avoid being noticed by going human form), and Sean's example (which I disagree with... I'd think a talking hawk would draw more attention than a regular human being) outweigh the benefits of being a hawk, unless that hawk you look like is immediately recognizable as "you" in any, or at least most settings. Otherwise, you're comparing minor inconveniences and the power to conceal your identity (stealth, concealment, etc).[/quote']

 

 

Oh it would draw more attention, I have no doubt. Probably draw a crowd...if only that were the point

[Tonio]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

Hrmph... I've thought this over... I've decided I would allow this, but only as part of a whole. That is, the SFX for your linked Shrinking and Flight is "turns into a hawk". I'd still be very wary of it, and if it's used for identity concealment, or to "hide" in plain sight, too much, I'd have the character pay for a linked Shape Shift as well... or I'd rule that the character is recognizable as himself (rather than as a random hawk) upon closer inspection (anything more than a cursory glance, really). Why? Well, maybe because the hawk still has the character's features/colors/whatever, or maybe because "everybody knows Hawkman turns into a hawk with golden feathers on his head" (especially if the character has a Public ID), or whatever, would depend on many factors.

 

I don't really "like" it, and were I building the character, I'd include the Shape Shift in the first place.

 

Oh, btw... in case this post sounds like "ok, I've decided to allow you to do it that way"... that's not what I'm trying to say, at all! I hope I'm not coming through as being that arrogant.

 

I'm saying I've changed my point of view and would run my game similarly to how you'd run yours in this respect.

[JmOz]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

It's funny, I had decided weeks ago to make it either Shapeshift or Multiform, but I have found the conversation very intersting all the same. And as the OP I feel a need to play devil's advocate some...

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Would this require shapeshift

 

And that makes the PER penalty for Shrinking somewhat relevent to this discussion. Becoming the size of a hawk with Shrinking already gives a -4 to -6 penalty or so on others' PER rolls to see you. So why not allow for a trade off between "PER rolls to see you" and "PER rolls to identify you"?

 

Just a thought.