JmOz Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 I have a new idea for a limitation, this limitation can only be taken on MP Slots (While it could be converted for VPP's this is STRONGLY DISCOURAGED). Essentialy it is Increased Active Points: A power with this limitation is counted as having more active points for the purpose of using the MP reserve. Thus a 25 point power with a x2 Active Points would fill 50 points of a MP The level of limitation is equal to the same as Increased End Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 Hmm... interesting... What's the overall purpose, aside from reducing the cost of the slot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted August 6, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 The idea came from a mentalist I was working on, he had a suite of normal mental powers (Mind Control, Telepathy, etc) but I also wanted him to have TK but that it would take up more of his mental strength than it should (So he would have TK 10, but to use it he would have to dedicate at least 30 active points to it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Hiemforth Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 I don't see anything automatically abusive about it, though the GM would definitely have to ensure closely that this didn't violate the Standard Rule of Limitations. For example, in this construct, the Limitation is meaningless: 60 Multipower Reserve 6u 12d6 EB 6u 6 DEF/6d6 Entangle 6u 12d6 Flash 1u 2d6 Healing, Increased Active Points x3 (-1) In this case, it doesn't matter that the Healing sucks up more of the reserve, because he wouldn't have been able to use anything else in the MP concurrently anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebuchet Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Absolutely not. This would allow underpoint Powers to be put in Elemental Controls. It's hard to see any other legitimate use for such a "limitation". As such, I would require it to be an Advantage, not a Disadvantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eepjr24 Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 EC? I don't think he meant it for EC's, only for MP slots. I would see it as okay in some limited cases, especially if the slot was an M not a U. - Ernie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farkling Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Isn't that how the Lockout limitation works? And no, I wouldn't allow "Increased Active Points" as a limitation either. It actually would increase the range of most powers...that is an ADVANTAGE. For a REALLY good argument, I might go as high as 1/4 regardless of how much of the reserve it chewed up. From PowerGaming 102 :: Mostly Legal Munchkin Effects ***To put underpowered powers in Elemental Controls, you buy Hardened or Difficult to Dispel, or Affect Desol...those chew the points up fairly quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GamePhil Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Re: EC? Originally posted by eepjr24 I don't think he meant it for EC's, only for MP slots. I would see it as okay in some limited cases, especially if the slot was an M not a U. Absolutely correct, he specified Multipower slots, not EC slots and specifically argued against VPP's. As for JmOz: Absolutely right call on VPP's, as far as I can think of it doesn't limit the Power at all in those. As for the rest, some guidelines on when not to allow it would be advisable, as Derek H. already mentioned, but I can't see anything wrong with it other than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GamePhil Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Re: New Limitation Idea Originally posted by JmOz Essentialy it is Increased Active Points: A power with this limitation is counted as having more active points for the purpose of using the MP reserve. Please note the bolded text. It does not allow an increased range, and is not allowed on EC's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted August 7, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 As has already been said this is as a limitation for MP's no other type of framework. Also on the issue of range you will note that I said only for the purpose of filling the MP, thus no effect on the range of a power, nor how hard it would be to Dispel/Drain/Supress/etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Lucky Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Lockout is already a -1/2 limitation, and just says you can't use anything else in the MP. Maybe x2 Active Points for -1/4, but I can't see anything beyond that because the lockout would be more limiting at -1/2 than any other iteration of your limitation, while doing basically the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GamePhil Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Originally posted by Dr Lucky Lockout is already a -1/2 limitation This is an excellent point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Hiemforth Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Originally posted by Dr Lucky Lockout is already a -1/2 limitation, and just says you can't use anything else in the MP. Actually, Lockout says you can't use any other Powers at all... not just no other Powers from the MP. However, your point is well taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmOz Posted August 7, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Very good point Dr Lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jogger Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Hmmmm 60 Multipower 6u 12d6 Energy Blast 1u +20 STR, Increased Active Cost x3, (-1) 1u +20 ED Force Field, Increased Active Cost x3, (-1) 1u 4" Stretching, IAC x3, (-1) (etc, etc, etc...) You would also have to watch out for an intentionally large multipower reserve with several Increased Active Cost slots. Not that I haven't done this with END Reserve and Increase Endurance Cost, mind you. I would never do that. 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.