Enforcer84 Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 I'm building an energy projector; Fire/heat based. One problem for the character is that unlike many energy projectors, he really isn't any tougher than the average joe on the street. He's highly resistant to heat and fire but that's it. so, his team gadgeteer has developed a nice little forcefield belt for him. The belt, so as not to impede his powers, does not protect against heat/fire. (He's already got that covered) so do you think that would even be worth a -1/4 limitation or should I just make it a +0 and leave it at that? at this point we're talking about 6 pts of savings from the limitation if any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rapier Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... I'm building an energy projector; Fire/heat based. One problem for the character is that unlike many energy projectors, he really isn't any tougher than the average joe on the street. He's highly resistant to heat and fire but that's it. so, his team gadgeteer has developed a nice little forcefield belt for him. The belt, so as not to impede his powers, does not protect against heat/fire. (He's already got that covered) so do you think that would even be worth a -1/4 limitation or should I just make it a +0 and leave it at that? at this point we're talking about 6 pts of savings from the limitation if any. My first impression was -1/4. It doesn't protect against a Limited Set of Circumstances. However, upon re-reading, it's a -0. If a guy is blind and has Discrim, Targetting, Hearing does he get a Disad for being blind? Of course, not! In this case, the Limitation on the power (not vs Fire/Heat) is completely offset by the 40 DEF (Only vs Fire/Heat). It may not seem fair the FireLad (with the 40 DEF vs Fire/Heat) gets -0 for his DamRedux, while WaterGirl (with no Fire/Heat resistance) gets -2 for her FF (Not vs Fire/Heat), but that is what is important about making sure that the characters are given a good once-over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vondy Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Unless his defenses against fire/heat is non-persistant or doesn't work in some situations its a -0 in my estimation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enforcer84 Posted February 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Unless his defenses against fire/heat is non-persistant or doesn't work in some situations its a -0 in my estimation. Sounds good. His Fire defense is at the moment 10 rED and 75% Damage Reduction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alibear Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... If a guy is blind and has Discrim, Targetting, Hearing does he get a Disad for being blind? Of course, not! Erm that is still a disadvantage unless he can read with his ears and make out colour some other way. Can he hear through soundproof glass? Anyway, the blindness is no longer as limiting but it is still a disadvantage. Back on topic: I would say flavour unless you or the GM can come up with a way for the GM to use that limitation against you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Obvious Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... I'm piping in to say I agree with Alibear on the senses thing. If being sighted and having enhanced hearing is worth X amount, and being blind without super senses is worth Y, being blind with super hearing should fall somewhere in between. It seems to come up on the boards a lot that being blind with super hearing should cost the same as being sighted with super hearing, and I just don't see the logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Well your character has spent quite a lot on defences but mainly as damage reduction, and he is far from invulnerable to fire in any event: a Fire EB that does 13 or more Body will be doing body damage to him, and that's a reasonably scary thought. If I was GM, you'd get a limitation. When we start amending limtiations because of overall build we run into all kinds of problems: for instance a super strong character: does he still get a -1 for his OAF Ray Gun that also generates a force field? He is going to be hard to disarm, because he is so strong and it is going to be hard to damage because the force field the OAF generates will protect it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... You know something, ask yourself this question: If he is hit by fire would the shield have provided extra protection without this limitaion? if the answer is yes, then he deserves some savings, really simple IMO, I realise people get hung up over the "A limitiation that does not limit is worth 0 points" but the fact is you have spent some points on an ability, that ability is not as useful to your character as it should be, thus you get a discount. Just because you have spent points elsewhere that compensates in part for it does not mean you are not being limited Don't get me started on the whole X that does not X is worth 0 points thing, I think it makes a good guideline, but you have to look at balance issues, a person who can compensate for a disad by spending points on abilities should be allowed to take in disads about the same amount of points he spent on abilities to compensate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebuchet Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... You know something, ask yourself this question: If he is hit by fire would the shield have provided extra protection without this limitaion? if the answer is yes, then he deserves some savings, really simple IMO, I realise people get hung up over the "A limitiation that does not limit is worth 0 points" but the fact is you have spent some points on an ability, that ability is not as useful to your character as it should be, thus you get a discount. Just because you have spent points elsewhere that compensates in part for it does not mean you are not being limited Don't get me started on the whole X that does not X is worth 0 points thing, I think it makes a good guideline, but you have to look at balance issues, a person who can compensate for a disad by spending points on abilities should be allowed to take in disads about the same amount of points he spent on abilities to compensate I agree. Besides, unless the defensive Power is on all the time then there will be times it doesn't protect; and those times should provide some discount. I'd say in this case -1/4 is about right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodstone Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Without seeing the character, I could go either way on this one. But I think the fact it's a Focus actually sways me towards -1/4. If someone borrows/steals it from him it's definitely a liability that it doesn't protect them from Heat/Flame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Without seeing the character, I could go either way on this one. But I think the fact it's a Focus actually sways me towards -1/4. If someone borrows/steals it from him it's definitely a liability that it doesn't protect them from Heat/Flame. Noooo....focus is a limitation: is this an additional one? It doesn't work against fire, fire is a common enough attack to make this a limitation on the power, it gets a limitation. EOS. Really we can't look at synergies like that, we just need to decide if the limitation proposed is covered by other limitations in the power and if not whether it is of sufficient 'value' to justify at least a -1/4. Then our work here is done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nexus Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... My first impression was -1/4. It doesn't protect against a Limited Set of Circumstances. However, upon re-reading, it's a -0. If a guy is blind and has Discrim, Targetting, Hearing does he get a Disad for being blind? Of course, not! [off topic] IMO, he'd get a reduced one. Being blind is still a disadvantage even if it's not quite as significant for him. He can't read normal print, visual identification is useless to him, etc. He's not as limited in combat as usual but he's still limited. [/off topic] I actually think it is worth a -1/4 on a Forcefield unless the character is completely invulnerable to fire. Its a Forcefield, normally it would add any ED provided to his resistance against Fire Attacks, in this case it doesn't thus it's limited Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodstone Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Noooo....focus is a limitation: is this an additional one? It doesn't work against fire' date=' fire is a common enough attack to make this a limitation on the power, it gets a limitation. EOS.[/quote'] For this POWER, looked at in a vacuum, it is a limitation. Just about anyone else using that belt would definitely get the limitation, no questions asked. For this CHARACTER, this is probably not a limitation worth any points... but since the power could potentially be used by others I think it possibly deserves the savings. Mind you, without knowing the game or seeing the characters, I'm only guessing on this stuff based on the "highly resistant to fire" statement. Of course, I've seen how Chad designs stuff. Highly resistant is probably 75% rDR and +30 rED, both only vs Heat/Flame. Really we can't look at synergies like that... We can't? Why is this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nexus Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... I don't see it's not a limitation for this character. He's not completely immune to fire just highly resistant to it. By limiting his force field he's giving up being more resistant to fire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Sounds good. His Fire defense is at the moment 10 rED and 75% Damage Reduction. Is that +10 rED Only Vs. Fire/Heat, or 10 rED total? If it's the latter, then any fire/heat attack that exceeds 10 BODY rolled on the dice will do at least 1 BODY Damage to the character with every hit. Unless the Damage Class for the game this character will be used in is very low, I'd say that his FF not granting extra protection against this effect is worth a Limitation on the FF. If it's the former, then -0 would probably be appropriate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... For this POWER, looked at in a vacuum, it is a limitation. Just about anyone else using that belt would definitely get the limitation, no questions asked. For this CHARACTER, this is probably not a limitation worth any points... but since the power could potentially be used by others I think it possibly deserves the savings. Mind you, without knowing the game or seeing the characters, I'm only guessing on this stuff based on the "highly resistant to fire" statement. Of course, I've seen how Chad designs stuff. Highly resistant is probably 75% rDR and +30 rED, both only vs Heat/Flame. We can't? Why is this? It is 75%/10rED. That's not the point though. I really don't see how you can individualise the value of limtiations based on build and stay sane. Like I say, strong people with accessable focuses should get less of a limitation if you follow that logic. The other way to look at it is this if he's 'invulnerable' to fire it is because he has spent points becoming invulnerable to fire. Watch: 20 rED: only v fire (-1): 15 points PLUS 20ed Armour* (not v fire -1/4): 24 points Total cost 15+24= 39 points Compare to a straight purchase of 20 ed: 30 points You are ALREADY paying more for the same utility. Why kick a man when he is down? *OK the original example was a FF and there was some DR in there too, but it is easier and clearer to compare apples to apples. The example does still work if you use FF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Obvious Posted February 28, 2008 Report Share Posted February 28, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Sean lays it out in plain language. You can let the guy spend more points on a more colorful build, or you can nitpick limitation values and get a minmaxed vanilla character. There are combinations of powers that can be abusive, but the fire-resistant guy with armor against everything but fire and the blind super-hearing guy are not them. I really can't think of much that is abusive beyond powers that are all-or-nothing depending on some circumstance combined with powers that provide that circumstance easily, like the infamous "only in darkness" + Darkness combo. And even that sort of thing has its counters, although they may be highly uncommon in some settings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opal Posted February 28, 2008 Report Share Posted February 28, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... Since the FF /would/ help you if it worked vs fire (fire attacks would be even less effective against you), it's clearly still a limitation. If you had some sort of absolute immunity to fire, the idea that it's not really limitting you would have more credence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenn Posted February 28, 2008 Report Share Posted February 28, 2008 Re: Limitation? Or just flavor... What Opal said. If the force field did work against heat/fire then with the force field his defenses against fire would be 10 rED PLUS the value of the Force Field's ED and then the damage reduction. Calling X the value of the Force Field's ED, as long is X is a positive number, 10 + X > 10. This would be more protection, so it's a limitation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.