Handcuffs on a budget

[JmOz]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

deleted for mispost

[Vulcan]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

I just came up with a version I like, and as this is post 50, here it is

 

Handcuffs: +20 STR, Uncontrolled (+1/2) (30 Active Points); 4 Recoverable Charges (-1/2), No Figured Characteristics (-1/2), Only for purposes of Grabs/holds (-1/2), Max Strength of 30 (-1/4), OIF (-1/2)

 

OK, By the book you can add normal damage up to the base value of the power (20 points), with the lim of Max Strength so Str 30, Uncontroled allows the user to walk away, charges brings the power down to 0 endurance.

 

I think this is the best that can be expected. the uncontrolled is broken by either a key, damage to 6 def 2 body, lockpicking roll (-4) or by "Breaking the hold". This power uses the standard effect rules, so is considered to be 6 body for the strength vs strength contest.

 

Toughts?

 

If it works for you and your GM, go for it.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Doesn't Uncontrolled and non-continuing charges get weird? A non-continuing charge only lasts for one phase, does putting Uncontrolled on it change that?

[JmOz]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Doesn't Uncontrolled and non-continuing charges get weird? A non-continuing charge only lasts for one phase' date=' does putting Uncontrolled on it change that?[/quote']

 

In brief, yes it does I beleive

[JmOz]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

More I think about it, maybe not...interesting question, humm, got to research more, interesting...sorry for posting before so quick without thought behind it, must research more...interesting...

[schir1964]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

I just came up with a version I like, and as this is post 50, here it is

 

Handcuffs: +20 STR, Uncontrolled (+1/2) (30 Active Points); 4 Recoverable Charges (-1/2), No Figured Characteristics (-1/2), Only for purposes of Grabs/holds (-1/2), Max Strength of 30 (-1/4), OIF (-1/2)

 

OK, By the book you can add normal damage up to the base value of the power (20 points), with the lim of Max Strength so Str 30, Uncontroled allows the user to walk away, charges brings the power down to 0 endurance.

 

I think this is the best that can be expected. the uncontrolled is broken by either a key, damage to 6 def 2 body, lockpicking roll (-4) or by "Breaking the hold". This power uses the standard effect rules, so is considered to be 6 body for the strength vs strength contest.

 

Toughts?

I would have used Independent instead of OIF, but this is pretty much what I was suggesting at the beginning. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[JmOz]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Why not build them with STR (as a Power) with the following:

Grab Only

Extra Time

Independent

Set Effect (Optional)

 

You can build the Handcuffs to hold Normal Humans or Creatures at various levels.

 

Just A Thought

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

I would have used Independent instead of OIF, but this is pretty much what I was suggesting at the beginning. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

So you did, so you did, let me hit you with the rep stick.

 

HOwever I don't see independent, why should I loose points if I loose my handcuffs?

[schir1964]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

So you did, so you did, let me hit you with the rep stick.

 

However I don't see independent, why should I loose points if I loose my handcuffs?

Actually, Independent is a mechanic that is hard to implement by the GM in games where Equipment isn't free.

 

Therefore....

 

I think that in games where everything is paid for with points a new optional system of rules need to be enforced.

 

First, the Money Perk system must be applied to everyone (regardless of level).

 

• A character who doesn't generate average income does not have access to mundane equipment without paying character points.
  
• A character who generates normal income has access to mundane equipment that can be purchased the local store without paying character points. Campaign time must be spent obtaining such equipment.
  
• A character who generates above normal income has access to mundane equipment that can be purchased at specialty stores or can try bribery to access mundane restricted equipment without paying character points. Campaign time must be spent obtaining such equipment.
  

 

Second, other types perks may allow access to mundane restricted equipment without paying character points. Campaign time must be spent obtaining such equipment.

 

Thus, Handcuffs are built as a Power with all the limitations and so forth, including Independent. Another descriptor is added to the build (Mundane Equipment). This makes this power available to any who has access to this equipment in the Campaign.

 

Those who have Disadvantages, or Lack the appropriate Perks, can not get this Equipment without paying character points.

 

Those who have the appropriate Perk (or other criteria set up by the GM), can get this equipment without having to pay character points, just the time to obtain and carry that equipment with them.

 

But this is a more comprehensive solution to Independent Items in general.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Sean Waters]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

... Dude' date=' there's no need to shout.[/quote'] There is, you've been flashed.

 

...Besides' date=' I don't see it.[/quote'] ...and it covered a lot of senses.

 

...What's wrong with having an entangle go away? Sure' date=' it's an instant power, and that means (in a theoretical sense) that the use of the power has ended. However, unlike a lot of other instant powers, this one has a [u']continuing physical manifestation[/u] that exists independantly of the use of the power.

 

Gaping wounds are a continuing physical manifestation of a damaging power that exist independently of the use of the power, but suggesting you can make those go away will get you looked at askance.

 

 

...Recovering the charge doesn't mean the power is undone. If I have a bow and 4 arrows bought as recoverable charges and I shoot one of them' date=' recovering the arrow doesn't mean the damage goes away.[/quote'] ...and recovering the entangle does not meant hat the entangle goes away.

 

...So' date=' in light of that, what's wrong with having the entangle go away based on the FX of 'I go over and unlock the cuffs' ? That is actually [i']more[/i] limiting than what is usual for a continuing charge (not a lot more, possibly not even worth taking a limitation over, but still, it doesn't warrant your... enthusiasm).

 

I can get enthusiastic, can't I? Sometimes overly so...

 

 

 

...Now I need a separate power to recover my charges? So what' date=' should I buy the handcuff key as a 23d6 Dispel Entangle, Standard Effect, Only works on Handcuffs? So how would that work if the entangled person had power defense? Or the person who slapped the handcuffs on - does the Handcuff Key need to be NND to cover that (defense would be not being handcuffs, I guess)?[/quote']

 

No, you need a seperate power to undo the effects of your charges where those effects are normally not within your control.

 

...And incidentally' date=' that whole mechanic wouldn't work anyway because, as you pointed out, the power is instant. So the Entangle power is no longer present to Dispel (or Drain, or Supress, for that matter). [/quote']

 

...but I'm not suggesting you need a dispel, - you need something that either transforms the entangle into something else, temporarily, then something that allows you to transform it back, possibly with a different target.

 

...So I guess the Handcuff Key becomes a 2d6 Drain Body' date=' Standard Effect, NND (Defense is not being handcuffs), 0 END (50 Active) Only vs. Handcuffs (Which really isn't a limitation because of the NND), OAF (Key, -1)... I can't think of any other limitations that would be appropriate. So it costs 25 points to be able to release someone from the handcuffs I put on them so I can recover my recoverable charge - for a power that only cost me 9 points in the first place.[/quote']

 

Er...

 

...Does anyone else find this whole line of reasoning ludicrous? It's a freaking pair of handcuffs! We all know what they are' date=' what they do, what they look like, how they're supposed to work... Yeesh. It's not that big a deal to make this much fuss over.[/quote']

 

It is, indeed, a pair of freaking handcuffs, but entangle is not the way to go, which is why it all seems a bit silly. Entangle works IF (sorry - shouting again) you ignore the way that this and every related power works. Now call me old fashioned, but I don't even care that Mr Long thinks it is OK to break the rules this way. If the rules need breaking to make a simple, common sfx work then the rules need looking at, and I'm not talking about lists of exceptions - we need to look at what we want entangle , or a similar power, to do - if it is instant, that is what it is, if it is not, we should not be describing it that way.

 

 

...Unsane, perhaps. After all, I play a lot of RPG's.

 

And the Marines did turn me down back in '89, just after I took the psych evaluation. Hmmm....

 

Sanity is over rated. OCD is the way forward **twitch**

[Vulcan]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Eh. It just strikes me as silly to obsess about the exact rules mechanics of entangle over a pair of handcuffs. It wouldn't even be an issue for a character with a 45 STR, he could just go over there and tear the entangle off. Or with a 45 AP attack power he could use that to blow it off. And given that most campaigns have at least a 45 AP limit, what difference does it make? If it makes you feel better, I can house-rule that removing the handcuffs takes an attack action...

 

Oooh! I've got it: 45 STR (standard effect); OAF (Key, -1), Only to 'break' handcuff-based entangle (-2), 1 Recoverable charge (-1&1/4). 8 points! And since it is technically a full-phase action (since you're breaking them out exactly), that takes your attack action to perform. Simple.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Eh. It just strikes me as silly to obsess about the exact rules mechanics of entangle over a pair of handcuffs. It wouldn't even be an issue for a character with a 45 STR, he could just go over there and tear the entangle off. Or with a 45 AP attack power he could use that to blow it off. And given that most campaigns have at least a 45 AP limit, what difference does it make? If it makes you feel better, I can house-rule that removing the handcuffs takes an attack action...

 

Oooh! I've got it: 45 STR (standard effect); OAF (Key, -1), Only to 'break' handcuff-based entangle (-2), 1 Recoverable charge (-1&1/4). 8 points! And since it is technically a full-phase action (since you're breaking them out exactly), that takes your attack action to perform. Simple.

 

I prefer to think that, rather than obsessing over the exact rules mechanics for handcuffs (Player: can my character have some handcuffs? Me: Sure!), I'm obsessing over the principles behind the building of handcuffs with the Hero System.

 

I don't think that is silly, because a really good understanding of how powers work (and using examples like 'handcuffs' is an excellent way to work out how to apply the system) expands your understanding of the system as a whole. That's why I get into these discussions, or we might as well answer every post with, "Well, it's up to the GM, isn't it? He can make something up."

 

When I'm GMing, that's what I do - I make stuff up on the fly, probably not even worrying about what power I'm using - it depends what is going to happen to the handcuffs - generally someone is going to try and break them, so we just assign a STR or a DEF and BODY and go for it. However, if I've had a discussion like this I'm far more likely to apply the stuff I make up consistently with the actual rules.

[casualplayer]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Questions posted here point out flaws and obtuseness in the rules, hopefully leading to the improvement of our beloved HERO System.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

So mote it be.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(I have no idea what that means)

[Maur]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

So mote it be.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(I have no idea what that means)

so be it; amen; - a phrase in some rituals, as that of the Freemasons.

[schir1964]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

So mote it be.(I have no idea what that means)

I know what a mote is, I just can't figure out your context for using it.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Tonio]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

I know what a mote is, I just can't figure out your context for using it.

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Archaic. "Must", "may", "might", etc... "So mote it be", as Maur points out, roughly "May it be so" or "so must it be", akin to the hebrew "amen", or the pastafarian "rAmen".

[Sean Waters]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

I know this: it winds people up if you end every sentence with those words.

 

So mote it be!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

With a big nod in the direction of Presdidigitator and Schir1964, I reckon this works:

 

Handcuffs: 45 active, 10 real

 

+30 STR, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (45 Active Points); Independent (-2), Limited Power Power loses about a third of its effectiveness (Only to attach a limb to another limb or object; -1/2), Limited Power Power loses about a third of its effectiveness (Destroyed if defeated in a STR v STR contest; -1/2), Limited Power Power loses about a third of its effectiveness (Once set can only be be removed with a lockpick roll or key; -1/2)

 

The 45 AP gives them a DEF of 9, if you use the same rules as 'focus'. That feels about right for hard steel, but not much of it. I suppose technically you could use focus too, but I'm not sure it works well here.

 

Independent is nice in that it completely divorces them from the person owning them - and they still work if, for instance, that person dies. 10 points might seem a lot to potentially have to lose forever but, as a GM I would have no problem treating this as an easily replaceable point loss - you just go get another set of cuffs. If you are not happy with independent, make it OAF. That ups the cost to 13 active. Still within OP parameters, pretty much.

[schir1964]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

...Independent is nice in that it completely divorces them from the person owning them - and they still work if' date=' for instance, that person dies. 10 points might seem a lot to potentially have to lose forever but, as a GM I would have no problem treating this as an easily replaceable point loss - you just go get another set of cuffs. If you are not happy with independent, make it OAF. That ups the cost to 13 active. Still within OP parameters, pretty much.[/quote']

Well, one of the nice things about Independent, is that there is nothing preventing the player from having the character take the time and effort to recover the power in question, thus regaining those points.

 

- Christopher Mullins (8^D)

[schir1964]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Alternate build (based on Sean Waters and JmOz components).

 

Handcuffs [20 STR: 50 Active Points / 9 Real Points]

• Zero Endurance (+1/2)
  
• Persistent (+1/2) (Required for Uncontrolled portion of the power)
  
• Uncontrolled (+1/2) (Power is turned off by unlocking Handcuffs with the key or other method)
  
• Independent (-2) (Power is external to character and anyone can use it)
  
• No Figured Characteristics (-1/2)
  
• Hold Only (-1) (May Not Grab Under Own Volition Or Add STR)
  
• Only Vs Two Appropriate Sized Limbs/Objects And Required Distance (-1/2)
  
• Real Object: Power Breaks On Failed STR vs STR Contest or Enough Body Damage (-1/2)
  

Using the doubling rule (+5 Points = x2):

 

8 Sets Of Handcuffs [20 STR: 88 Active Points (50 Active Points Per Set) / 16 Real Points]

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Sean Waters]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Alternate build (based on Sean Waters and JmOz components).

 

Handcuffs [20 STR: 50 Active Points / 9 Real Points]

 

• Zero Endurance (+1/2)
  
• Persistent (+1/2)
  
• Uncontrolled (+1/2)
  
• Independent (-2)
  
• No Figured Characteristics (-1/2)
   
  
• Hold Only (-1) (May Not Grab Under Own Volition Or Add STR)
   
  
• Only Vs Two Appropriate Sized Limbs/Objects (-1/2)
  
• Real Object - Power Breaks On Failed STR vs STR Contest (-1/2)
  

 

Using the doubling rule (+5 Points = x2):

 

8 Sets Of Handcuffs [20 STR: 88 Active Points (50 Active Points Per Set) / 16 Real Points]

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Nice.

 

I don't think you need uncontrolled as independent does most of the stuff it is good for, and whilst I'm generally against limitations also being advantages, there comes a time when you just have to bow your head and accept the inevitble.

 

 

Also I think the doubling adds on after everything, so shouldn't add as part of the base cost. I could be wrong.

[schir1964]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

I don't think you need uncontrolled as independent does most of the stuff it is good for' date=' and whilst I'm generally against limitations also being advantages, there comes a time when you just have to bow your head and accept the inevitable.[/quote']

This is where the vagueness of Independent creates a problem. I've always read Independent as making the power external to the character (or the power doesn't come from the character), thus allowing any character to use the power. However, I don't think this implies a focus or object of any sort but it does have the universal definition component thereof (but I could be wrong).

 

Addendum (lost focus on the statement made):

Uncontrolled vs Independent - Uncontrolled seems by application to mean that once the character uses a power, it continues operating under its own volition doing whatever it is designed to do. I don't see this as overlapping what Independent does. But again, I can't verify the specifics of this until I can get access to my book.

 

Also I think the doubling adds on after everything' date=' so shouldn't add as part of the base cost. I could be wrong.[/quote']

Not sure and I don't have the book handy. Just playing it safe though.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Updated post above.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[prestidigitator]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

So my next question is: WHY are we using Str instead of the power that is designed to do this (Entangle)? Because Entangle is too expensive? Should we then be asking if Entangle is overcosted? Should the cost of Entangle be based on some kind of modified Str? Maybe with Body or a freaky End or Ablative type part thrown in and the base Str Linked to it so when the flaky part goes down it all crumbles?

[schir1964]

Re: Handcuffs on a budget

 

Post Removed.

 

I realized that Prestidigitator's question wasn't directed at me but JmOz.

 

I'll let him respond.

 

- Christopher Mullins