Simple questions on AP caps

[Paragon]

Re: Simple questions on AP caps

 

In the published writeups' date=' I think it's only -1/2 (!).[/quote']

 

 

Even worse, then.

[Opal]

Re: Simple questions on AP caps

 

50% DRr is 30 pts (fire is always energy, afterall), so at -2 it would be 10 pts, at -1, 15. A -1/2 limitation sounds silly for something that specific. Yes, fire attacks are common - heros run into burning buildings, militaries have flame throwers, and so forth. But, seriously, -1/2 is comparable to a 14- activation, which is a power that works 90% of the time. No way are 90% of energy attacks fire. Of course, activation is also unpredictable, while you could know to dodge non-fire attacks, but still...

 

 

Another rule of thumb I've seen used for limitations is that a 1/2 limitation should come up aproximately once every other game. That'd mean you'd expect to be hit by nothing but fire attacks in about half of the sessions you play in.

[Vestnik]

Re: Simple questions on AP caps

 

. No way are 90% of energy attacks fire.

 

In "realistic" settings, they probably are. What else is there -- electricity?

 

In general though I think you are right. For some reason the Limitation values in the published writeups often seem way too low to me.

[Paragon]

Re: Simple questions on AP caps

 

50% DRr is 30 pts (fire is always energy, afterall), so at -2 it would be 10 pts, at -1, 15. A -1/2 limitation sounds silly for something

 

 

Had a brain thing, obviously, but is it worth it even at 15 or 10? You can buy quite a lot of more consistent value out of that after all.

 

 

that specific. Yes, fire attacks are common - heros run into burning buildings, militaries have flame throwers, and so forth. But, seriously, -1/2 is comparable to a 14- activation, which is a power that works 90% of the time. No way are 90% of energy attacks fire. Of course, activation is also unpredictable, while you could know to dodge non-fire attacks, but still...

 

 

You're preaching to the choir with me; the specialized defense limitations have always seemed overconservative to me; as you can see, I'm not entirely sure they aren't overconservative at -2 most of the time.

 

You do run into the problem that if you set fire or electricity at -2, you _really_ need to crank up the limitation on things like radiation or sonics, though.

 

 

Another rule of thumb I've seen used for limitations is that a 1/2 limitation should come up aproximately once every other game. That'd mean you'd expect to be hit by nothing but fire attacks in about half of the sessions you play in.

 

Or at least regularly be hit by them in half, yes.

[Paragon]

Re: Simple questions on AP caps

 

In "realistic" settings, they probably are. What else is there -- electricity?

 

 

For offensive uses outside of wartime, I'd argue electricity is actually more common than fire.

 

But while you're correct in general, that's an arguement about ED costing what it does in general in a lot of heroic settings; its probably overpriced in the first place for how often it comes up.

 

 

In general though I think you are right. For some reason the Limitation values in the published writeups often seem way too low to me.

 

Been that way for a long time though; this problem goes back at least to 4th, and probably earlier.

[Opal]

Re: Simple questions on AP caps

 

In earlier editions limitted power limitations were often a little more charitable - and, thus, abused. IIRC, 4th & FRED were more cautious about giving out standard numbers for such things. The limitation for 'only vs fire' should depend upon the campaign.

 

FREX: In a fantasy game replete with fireball-hurling mages and fire-breathing dragons and greek fire - and not so many lightning bolts or other types of energy attacks, it could be quite low. In a typical superhero game, yes, there will certainly be some fire attacks, but there will be /many/ other sorts of energy attacks, as well, so a meaningful limitation is in order. In a sci-fi game where everyone and his brother has a laser, stun gun, or other energy weapon - but flamethrowers are low-tech and rarely utilized, and every ship and building has super-efficient automatic fire supression, /and/ half the combat scenarios happen in hard vaccum - it would be a very substantial limitation. But, everybody already knows this....

[Paragon]

Re: Simple questions on AP caps

 

In earlier editions limitted power limitations were often a little more charitable - and, thus, abused. IIRC, 4th & FRED were more cautious about giving out standard numbers for such things. The limitation for 'only vs fire' should depend upon the campaign.

 

 

While I don't disagree generically, nor with your comment at the end, I don't think I ever saw a defense flaw abused appreciably; there were ways to game the system with attacks to one degree or another, but since you don't get to chose who attacks you or with what, it was immensely harder to make a flaw irrelevant there.