Does anyone have any idea...

[Bandit]

What is the Rationale behind...

Limiting EC's to only powers that cost endurance?

 

Should this include powers that normally cost endurance that have had their endurance reduced to zero?

 

I am trying to make an educated decision as to whether to include this rule in my game or not and I would like to understand why this restriction was included.

 

**Apparently I posted this originally to the wrong forum.

[Tonio]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

Well, as far as your 2nd question, it includes powers that normally cost END and have the Reduced END Advantage (at either 1/2 or 0 END). It also includes powers that normally don't cost END, but have the Costs END Limitation.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

The idea, as I understand it is that an EC is a single power whose effects cover lots of game specific mechanics.

 

That means like flame body could provide flight and damage reduction and EB and a few other powers. All of those effects are produced by exerting this single power in some way and so they are all potentially END costing powers.

 

This makes the one drain affects all EC powers more understandable as well.

 

 

Doc

[Bandit]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

Well' date=' as far as your 2nd question, it includes powers that normally cost END and have the Reduced END Advantage (at either 1/2 or 0 END). It also includes powers that normally [i']don't[/i] cost END, but have the Costs END Limitation.

 

I'm not sure I understand your answer...

by includes do you mean EC's CAN include powers with the zero END advantage or do you mean that they are included in the restriction?

[薔薇語]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

What is the Rationale behind...

Limiting EC's to only powers that cost endurance?

 

Should this include powers that normally cost endurance that have had their endurance reduced to zero?

 

I am trying to make an educated decision as to whether to include this rule in my game or not and I would like to understand why this restriction was included.

 

**Apparently I posted this originally to the wrong forum.

 

 

First question is yes. If it costed END to start with then, you can put in a EC regardless if it cost end after all avantages and limitations are applied. Also any power with the limitations "Cost Endurence" may be placed in an EC.

 

Now the reason behind this is to promote game balance. Without this limitation ECs would become a very abusive power framework for its low cost. Each Power framework has its limits that keep them in line with eachother and with individual powers as a whole.

*VPP* only let you have 66% (at most) of you active points allowed. So in a 30active point game the powers in a VPP will only ever be 20active points, making them lower effect on the world than a standard character. Benefit for this lower effect is having a near unlimited veriety.

*MP* can ussually only have one power in use at a time (with ultra slots). So sure you can have 101 differant attacks in it, but you only get to use one at a time. If you want to use more than one at a time you either have to buy the MP twice as large and that eats into the reason you have it in the first place, beside it will almost certainly be over the active point cap. And if you buy them as Flexable slots then each slot cost you more and the total effect is still capped out. But the benifit is that if you are willing to pay points up front for one power then you can buy other powers at a fraction of the cost (1/5 to 1/10th).

*EC* though are differant. They give you access to all powers at full value at once. You can get a fairly big price reduction at that. So what is the limitation, that right all powers must natively cost end to be in there or have the limitation applied to them. This will do one of two things. *A* Keep the powers limited in the time they can be used based on you end or *B* make you spend more character points per power then you would otherwise need to get your desired effect.

So while MP and VPP have limitations on the effect possible at any one time EC are limited by the amount of sustained effect, only way to do that is to make sure all powers have a end requirement or that you pay additional points for them to even it out. Otherwise I would buy my PD/ED/PowD/MD in a EC. 5pt EC with +10PD/+10ED/+10PowD/+10MD for only 20pts compared to 40pts.

 

Last point of thought is that Drain/Supress effect all powers in an EC, but something else to recal is that Drain/Supress (if targeting the framework) will effect all powers in an MP and VPP as well. The reason is to make all power frame works a little more even in cost to effect ratio with standard powers not bought through them.

 

 

I hope that helps. Now in my games I tend to be a little more forgiving when it comes to the EC end rule, but that is a personal choice and requires experience to insure it doesn't unbalance the game.

 

La Rose.

[pinecone]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

Yeah, what he said...otherwise you can get EC: Invulnrability 15

15: Damage Reduction x1/2 PDr

15: DR x1/2 EDr

15: Armor +10 PD/+10 ED

 

The only "limit" is you spend 60 pts for 90 pts of power...totally unballencing....

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

Yeah, what he said...otherwise you can get EC: Invulnrability 15

15: Damage Reduction x1/2 PDr

15: DR x1/2 EDr

15: Armor +10 PD/+10 ED

 

The only "limit" is you spend 60 pts for 90 pts of power...totally unballencing....

 

However, EC, in effect, links all the powers mutually, which means that draining one drains all, and, if you drain teh pool, at double rate. If you just build that with mutual links, you get a substantial cost break, and sticking it in an EC is less messy.

 

As to what can go in OFFICIALLY, powers that normally cost END but have the 0 END advantage can not go in an EC.

 

You can however buy an END using power with the advantage 'costs END to activate' and stick that in. Moreover, I skate around the rule by allowing non-END using powers to be bought with a -1/4 limtiation 'Costs END, but only to activate' and they can go in too. Makes no difference ubless you are stunned or KO'd.

 

As to why we have the rule I think it is probably for this reason: if all the sfx have to be the same, and they are all visible (as END using powers are) then it is more obvious that you are using an EC. Mind you you could do the same thing if you required all powers to be visible instead, and even then an opponent can only really take advantage if they have an appropriate adjustment power.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

..........................

Last point of thought is that Drain/Supress effect all powers in an EC, but something else to recal is that Drain/Supress (if targeting the framework) will effect all powers in an MP and VPP as well. The reason is to make all power frame works a little more even in cost to effect ratio with standard powers not bought through them.

 

 

........................

 

La Rose.

 

However, draining works very differently for an EC and a MP: for the MP you need to drain every slot, in effect, at the full AP of the power in the slot (not the slot cost), whereas with an EC if a drain affects any part of it, it applies to all parts of it.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

*VPP* only let you have 66% (at most) of you active points allowed. So in a 30active point game the powers in a VPP will only ever be 20active points' date=' making them lower effect on the world than a standard character. Benefit for this lower effect is having a near unlimited veriety. [/quote']

 

Uh, what? You can put a 30 Active Point power in a 30pt VPP. If you put -1 in limitations on each, you can have two 30 AP powers in that pool.

[Tonio]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

I'm not sure I understand your answer...

by includes do you mean EC's CAN include powers with the zero END advantage or do you mean that they are included in the restriction?

 

I meant EC's can include them. (See below.)

 

HAs to what can go in OFFICIALLY' date=' powers that normally cost END but have the 0 END advantage [u']can not go in an EC[/u].

 

According to 5ER, pg 314, it can go into an EC:

 

"Normally, all slots in an Elemental Control must cost END or have the Reduced Endurance Advantage (characters can buy the END cost down to 0 if they wish)."

[Tonio]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

Uh' date=' what? You can put a 30 Active Point power in a 30pt VPP. If you put -1 in limitations on each, you can have two 30 AP powers in that pool.[/quote']

 

I'm pretty sure what The Rose meant was that since a VPP has a control cost equal to, at least, 50% of the APs in the pool, the most APs a power in it can have is 66% of the total active cost (not the pool cost) of the VPP, "total active cost" being APs in the pool + control cost.

 

A 30pt VPP costs, at best, 45 APs (real cost can be less if you apply Limitations to the pool cost). The most APs any power in it can have is 30, which is 66% of 45 (well, closer to 67%.. it's two thirds).

[薔薇語]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

However' date=' EC, in effect, links all the powers mutually, which means that draining one drains all, and, if you drain teh pool, at double rate. If you just build that with mutual links, you get a substantial cost break, and sticking it in an EC is less messy.[/quote']

 

You can, and it does get messy, but I don't know if it will come out to be the same cost. EC will sill probably be cheeper.

 

 

As to what can go in OFFICIALLY, powers that normally cost END but have the 0 END advantage can not go in an EC.

 

Tonio beat me to it. But yes they can go into an EC, and the line of thought is that the character is paying 50% more for the power at least, so it is a worthy trade off.

 

However, draining works very differently for an EC and a MP: for the MP you need to drain every slot, in effect, at the full AP of the power in the slot (not the slot cost), whereas with an EC if a drain affects any part of it, it applies to all parts of it.

 

The way I understand it, and I could be wrong. If you have a Drain/Suppress that targets the Framework (VPP or MP) it will will cuase all powers to be used at lesser than original effect becuase the Framework isn't at full effect, and if you drain/suppress the whole Framework, then no power inside it can work. Am I incorrect in this assumption? I will check my book when I get my hands back on it.

 

I'm pretty sure what The Rose meant was that since a VPP has a control cost equal to, at least, 50% of the APs in the pool, the most APs a power in it can have is 66% of the total active cost (not the pool cost) of the VPP, "total active cost" being APs in the pool + control cost.

 

A 30pt VPP costs, at best, 45 APs (real cost can be less if you apply Limitations to the pool cost). The most APs any power in it can have is 30, which is 66% of 45 (well, closer to 67%.. it's two thirds).

 

Correct Tonio. In my example that I was working from I used 30 active points. When I built my Character for a teen champions game, we had 30active point caps for all powers. The character I had was a Teleios Jr style character with super science in Bio/Chem. So I built his VPP as 20pt pool and a 10pt cost control base, with no avantages. This ment it equaled 30active points. All powers I built inside the Pool, could only be at most 20active points (the cost of the pool). So my trade off was that I could build almost any power I needed in a given instence, but that power compared to others in the game would only be at 66% the max. That is the shortfall for VPP.

 

La Rose.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

Correct Tonio. In my example that I was working from I used 30 active points. When I built my Character for a teen champions game' date=' we had 30active point caps for all powers. The character I had was a Teleios Jr style character with super science in Bio/Chem. So I built his VPP as 20pt pool and a 10pt cost control base, with no avantages. This ment it equaled 30active points. All powers I built inside the Pool, could only be at most 20active points (the cost of the pool). So my trade off was that I could build almost any power I needed in a given instence, but that power compared to others in the game would only be at 66% the max. That is the shortfall for VPP.[/quote']

 

I've never seen a GM penalize VPPs (or any framework) that way. The important thing is the individual powers within the framework, IMO. If you count all parts of the VPP towards the AP limit, shouldn't you also count all parts of the Multipower and the Elemental Control that way as well?

[薔薇語]

Re: Does anyone have any idea...

 

I've never seen a GM penalize VPPs (or any framework) that way. The important thing is the individual powers within the framework' date=' IMO. If you count all parts of the VPP towards the AP limit, shouldn't you also count all parts of the Multipower and the Elemental Control that way as well?[/quote']

 

The GM doesn't count all powers in the VPP. Take for example, if you have HD, open it up and create a new VPP. If you look in HD the active point cost (unless you add avantages) of a 20pool is 30active becuase of the 20pt pool + 10pt cc = 30active. In a game with active point cap, this is importantant to remember. If you don't have Active Point Caps this limitation of a VPP compare to other frameworks, and standard powers goes away for the most part. The only limitations left is the cost of the pool, that doesn't get modified. So you have to buy (kinda like MP) about 66+% of one big power, then you get all the powers you want for free. That however seems unballancing and one of the reasons I like Active Point Caps, since it keeps all powers in line with eachother.

 

La Rose