Jump to content

More comfortable in fire than out


DataPacRat

Recommended Posts

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

I'm sorry if I offended. I just don't think that just because something is written down in the rules we have to accept it' date=' and you were using book legal as a reason why we should. At least that is how I read your post.[/quote']

 

No. I was pointing out an option that is in the books, including that it is optional since the topic was how to do that. It was an answer to the question posed. The reason I quoted the book was to point it's Optional according to the text. I didn't anyone had to use it or that it's the only way to acheive the effect. I wasn't even the first person to mention it. I was using "book legal" as term to explain that, buy the RAW it is there an option. I also said the gm might disallow it but might be more likely to use something printed instead of something else completely off the cuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

You make some very good points.

 

So that anyone with 'fire that affects desolid' can hit you with it? Does that make sense?

 

From a purely game-mechanic standpoint, I would think that Fire, affects desolid, would affect such a person. So maybe if you *really* want to be invulnerable, you should also buy some Armor, only vs. Fire attacks, as discussed upthread. A GM could rule otherwise, but 40 points (Desolid, 0 END, Persistent, Only vs. Fire -1) seems pretty cheap for complete invulnerability to any 1 SFX.

 

If someone points a fire atatck at you does it pass through, as if you are desolid, or do you stop it?

 

Actually, I'm not sure there's a rule for this for "normal" desolid either (somebody correct me if I'm wrong). Desolid makes you "immune" to attacks (5ER 147), but does that mean (A) you determine hit/miss normally, and then if a hit, no damage is done (this seems to be more in sync with the rules to me), or (B) all attacks automatically miss (this seems to better match the traditional SFX of most comic-book and fantasy desolidification). If (A), then a hit would definitely meant that the person behind the invulnerable type would not take damage. (Which seems to match the SFX of this kind of desolidification better). If (B) (or, on a miss with (A)), then one would apply the scatter rules from 5ER p.423, which state that ordinarily a miss is a full miss, but provides optional rules for scatter. Most GMs probably rule based on SFX most of the time.

 

A similar issue is, can you dive for cover in front of an attack to block it for another person (maybe this is what you were talking about originally). The difference between (A) and (B) again would come up, but in a way that seemingly highlights the SFX issue even more.

 

I think this kind of problem often arises when, in reasoning for effect, the rules effect clashes with our preconceived notions of SFX. People think of an Energy Blast as, well, an energy blast. So can an EB, no knockback, AE 1 hex, accurate, megascale (1 hex = diameter of earth), no range, be spread? Can it be bounced? I'm not sure what the rules would say, but it seems like at some point the GM just has to make a ruling based on common sense, dramatic sense, and rules balance (which may all cut in different directions) and move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

You make some very good points.

 

 

 

From a purely game-mechanic standpoint, I would think that Fire, affects desolid, would affect such a person. So maybe if you *really* want to be invulnerable, you should also buy some Armor, only vs. Fire attacks, as discussed upthread. A GM could rule otherwise, but 40 points (Desolid, 0 END, Persistent, Only vs. Fire -1) seems pretty cheap for complete invulnerability to any 1 SFX.

 

Isn't it even cheaper if you also buy Cannot Pass Through Solid Objects (-1/2)? That comes to 32 points, just 2 points more expensive than 75% Resistant ED Damage Reduction, Only vs. Fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

Regarding a limited Desolid and the need to buy Affects Real World... wouldn't it make sense that if you limit Desolid (for whatever reason, not necessarily to represent invulnerability) to a single SFX, then you should only have to buy Affects Real World if you want to affect that SFX? For example, I buy Desolid, only vs Fire. My hand passes through fires w/o me getting burnt. But I get hit (and hurt) by a thrown rock. I can pick up said rock (since I'm only Desolid to fire), but I can't stomp the fire out, unless I buy Affects Real World on my STR (I'm guessing STR, right?). If I'm Desolid to stone (say, I'm a stone elemental?), then I can affect most things normally, but I can't grab or otherwise manipulate stone objects, unless I buy Affects Real World for my STR. Likewise, my "Magma Blast" EB has no effect on stone, unless I buy it "Affects Real World".

 

I'm not saying this is how it works right now... I'm proposing it as a house rule, optional rule, official rule change, what have you. Whaddya think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

The way the sfx CAN work is really, really important to me.

 

I fully accept that someone with desolidification is 'invulnerable' to most attacks, but they are 'invulnerable' because they do not interact with them. The attacks cannot affect them, and the trade off is that they cannot affect the attacks.

 

The whole thing about limited desolid is that, it seems to me, it pops up there without addressing any of the issues that it creates.

 

Personally I would assume that, as a limited form of the power, the only thing that changes is that it only affects a limited subject, so there would still be no interaction between you and the thing you are desolid to.

 

If you are desolid ('invulnerable') to rocks, to use a given example, then rocks pass through you. If your friend is being crushed under a rock, you can't lift it off them, at least while you are desolid to it.

 

Does anyone think that isn't how it works?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

The way the sfx CAN work is really, really important to me.

 

I fully accept that someone with desolidification is 'invulnerable' to most attacks, but they are 'invulnerable' because they do not interact with them. The attacks cannot affect them, and the trade off is that they cannot affect the attacks.

 

The whole thing about limited desolid is that, it seems to me, it pops up there without addressing any of the issues that it creates.

 

Personally I would assume that, as a limited form of the power, the only thing that changes is that it only affects a limited subject, so there would still be no interaction between you and the thing you are desolid to.

 

If you are desolid ('invulnerable') to rocks, to use a given example, then rocks pass through you. If your friend is being crushed under a rock, you can't lift it off them, at least while you are desolid to it.

 

Does anyone think that isn't how it works?

 

And you should be able to help your friend if you bought Affects Real World for your STR, right?

 

If you're Desolid (Only to Fire), then you can't block someone's Fire Blast, unless you bought "Affects Real World" on your... I dunno, BODY? STR? ED?

 

(I'm not arguing, I'm asking whether you think the same way I do regarding this. I'm also not suggesting that a limited Desolid is the correct way to build Invulnerability; nor am I doing the opposite. I'm, in fact, chickening out and not discussing that issue!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

And you should be able to help your friend if you bought Affects Real World for your STR, right?

 

If you're Desolid (Only to Fire), then you can't block someone's Fire Blast, unless you bought "Affects Real World" on your... I dunno, BODY? STR? ED?

 

(I'm not arguing, I'm asking whether you think the same way I do regarding this. I'm also not suggesting that a limited Desolid is the correct way to build Invulnerability; nor am I doing the opposite. I'm, in fact, chickening out and not discussing that issue!)

 

No, to me the function of the SFX, Desolid, is just that. One way or another, you are untouched and\or unaffected by it. When Chris goes desolid vs. ranged attacks, they pass through his hex and keep going. If youre going to be tagged by a flamethrower, you can throw your arms up and the fire may appear to wash over you, but it is, in effect, going right on past you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

No' date=' to me the function of the SFX, Desolid, is [i']just that[/i]. One way or another, you are untouched and\or unaffected by it. When Chris goes desolid vs. ranged attacks, they pass through his hex and keep going. If youre going to be tagged by a flamethrower, you can throw your arms up and the fire may appear to wash over you, but it is, in effect, going right on past you.

 

Even if you buy Affects Real World on your BODY (and/or ED/PD/STR/whatever's appropriate)? I'd think that would mean that you COULD affect it (the SFX, in this case fire), even if it can't affect you, meaning you could stop it even if it would normally go past you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

I suppose that depends on how far you want to take it; then, honestly, I would rule it down and side with Sean, i.e., "Lemme get this right; you just bought desolid vs. fire, but affects real world on your BODY? So you bought Fire Immunity for silly cheap but without any of the drawbacks to being Desolid? Er..."

 

I agree that the solution (Desolid vs. Hellfire) is elegant and kludgey at the same time; I also feel that in some cases it's an accurate reflection of the power. I think that there's too much to 'overcome' in terms of possible SFX for you to physically 'block' the attack and still be immune to it; if you want to do that, then either the fire would need to be built as "does not affect natural inhabitants, -0" or you need to buy up Armor & DR.

 

My own spells use Desolid to simulate certain effects (Circles of Protection use it, in some cases, and there are a few others) with the understanding that I'm using a kludgey bypass, and it was still a 100+ AP point spell. :ugly: But that's neither here nor there. This is one of those cases where you have to make a GM call; if you want to go the desolid route, it's comparatively cheap and certainly effective, but I wouldn't allow the special effect to get twisted around a telephone pole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

No' date=' you're right. I notice you're avoiding answering the questions I asked. Hang on, I'm getting a premonition...[i']it's up to the[/i]...no, it's gone.

 

I'm not avoiding anything. I was dealing with your tone first. As I said, I'm not interested in having a conversation with someone on a topic that they can't seem to avoid being derisive about.

 

Being insulting isn't the best way to convince someone to talk rationally with you about something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

I'm not avoiding anything. I was dealing with your tone first. As I said, I'm not interested in having a conversation with someone on a topic that they can't seem to avoid being derisive about.

 

Being insulting isn't the best way to convince someone to talk rationally with you about something.

 

PCB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

... you know' date=' tragically, this doesn't help me out in the slightest. So what does PKB stand for, then? :think:[/quote']

 

At a guess I'd say Pot calling the Kettle Black. I guess insinuating that pointing out that someone is being derisive is equally as insulting as directing that derisive language at others. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

At a guess I'd say Pot calling the Kettle Black. I guess insinuating that pointing out that someone is being derisive is equally as insulting as directing that derisive language at others. :rolleyes:

 

There's nothing I can say to this that won't get me moderated. :hush:

 

Oh, wait, that would mean I... Oh, well, isn't that just clever? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: More comfortable in fire than out

 

At a guess I'd say Pot calling the Kettle Black. I guess insinuating that pointing out that someone is being derisive is equally as insulting as directing that derisive language at others. :rolleyes:

 

I was being derisive about the rules, I accept that, but I was not criticising any poster or their opinion, so I was not being insulting, I was not being personal. I've got to accept that I got drawn into that too. I'm sorry for that.

 

Anyway, I'm off on holiday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...