New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

[Trebuchet]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

The idea that the character is the best at X because the GM (either by volition or by mechanic) doesn’t allow anyone better at X in the universe, is a valid idea, and a quite useful one in some games, but it fails to accomplish two of my core goals.

 

First, a character can be the best Teleporter in the Universe, and yet still not have enough oomph to get from one end of the universe to the other. Or a character might be the most invulnerable Brink in the universe, and yet take tons of damage when the antimatter device explodes.

 

The only way to fix this with your idea is to not only make sure the character in question is the best at X, but that you never put him in a situation that in which his power to do X is not enough to handle it. It feels like a kludge, “Let’s see, Hero System can’t handle absolutes, but I my character wants to feel as if there’s nothing his power can’t handle, I better make sure that no circumstances arise where he wants to use his power at level higher than he has purchased.

That's a philosophical difference more than anything. I do understand where you're coming from; I just don't see any need for (and lots of reasons to dislike) such a capability in a role-playing game.

 

There's no precedent I'm aware of for this kind of absolute in the source material and it creates a host of problems in a role playing game; the largest of which is it creates tremendous problems for the GM to create a suitable challenge to characters possessing such Absolute abilities as you've proposed. You've left it no Achilles heel; no flaws for those characters who lack some sort of Absolute to exploit. (Even Superman had kryptonite.) That's inevitably going to mean that the only realistic way to challenge such a character is going to be another character with an Absolute; meaning these kinds of conflicts are probably going to be a lot more common that you seem to think they will be. It's not a problem for the GM who has infinite points to design bad guys; but it's going to be a major one for players. If you actually playtest this in a campaign I think you'll find it far more problematical than you expect.

 

If you're bound and determined to use this in your game, then I think the idea upthread of having it be a percentage of total character points rather than a fixed cost has a lot of merit. 33% or 50% of total character points seems about right.

 

In the meantime, keep the ideas coming. Just because we didn't like this one doesn't mean you won't have the next Great Idea.

[Trebuchet]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

Player A wants a power where he can Teleport through anything.

Player B wants a Force Wall nothing can get through.

 

Which player do you plan on disappointing?

NOT the one who brought the pizza.

[jtelson]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

If you read the posts they're actually VERY constructive. They explain in detail why this is a bad idea.

 

There have actually been several suggestions about how to make it work, it's just that apparently the idea that absolutes should be scalable is unacceptable.

 

The problem is that non-scaling absolutes of the nature being discussed leads to poor game balance and is contrary to the stated assumption that these abilities would be rare and interact infrequently.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

I call Shenanigans.

 

I call TGI Fridays or Olive Garden?

 

They will often conflict. And if the defensive one always wins, then the offensive one is no longer absolute. To see the conflicts, see below (using your own examples).

 

They will often *seem* to conflict, but if written in proper detail as I indicated, very few true conflicts remain

 

The primary reason Absolutes work poorly in Hero is that they don't scale at all. If we price Absolute Invulnerability to physical force, for example, at 120 points, no one in a game where character points total 150 or less can practically afford it, it's a huge point sink in games at 350 points, and everyone buys it in a game set around 1,000 points. It's either prohibitively expensive or mandatory to be competitive, depending on your point level.

 

This is a very good thinking point, and I appreciate you bringing it up. It does not of course deter me from pursuing the goal, but it brings up a true pitfall that needs to be taken into consideration.

 

Fantasy Hero has a fine structure for Absolutes. Buy enough of the ability that, given the structure of this game, it results in impossible, or near-impossible (must have a roll less than 3, or more than 18, for it to fail). Agree between GM and Player that this is now an "absolute". You bought enough defenses that no sword can inflict damage on you, based on the game world in question capping sword damage at 4d6 KA (so you have, say, 24 rPD and 120 PD, much of it only vs swords). You are invulnerable to swords. If someone with a 6d6 sword attack comes along, tough luck - this was agreed to be "invulnerable to swords".

 

This has been suggested multiple times above and below, and there I have explained why this does not achieve my goals.

 

An "attack always hurts", "attack always KO's" or "attack always kills" power is a conflicting absolute. You want an unhurtable character. I want an unstoppable attack. One of us will be unhappy.

 

It is true that in the extremely rare cases when two such characters come together, one character will be happier than the other. However, the Absolute Ability system does not promise literal Absolutes, but mechanical Absolutes when up against non-Absolutes. Think of it this way - in math, and this is true, there are different kinds of infinities, and some of them are bigger than others. However, ALL infinities are bigger than any single number, no matter how big you make it. It's the same thing here.

 

My goal is that Absolutes always trump or prevail against non-Absolutes. And even in Absolute vs Absolute (which as I said will be very rare), the majority of the time neither power will be overruled, since the outcome can be determined from how the Absolutes work themselves. Therefore, while one side may be happier than the other, both sides will the majority of the time know that their power wasn't working at less than full Absolute Strength.

 

That Indian with Absolute Dodge can't be hit, though. What happened to Cowboy's Absolute Marksmanship that never misses?

 

My Avatar of Death kills anyone dead - no ability to recover. Which Absolute prevails? Presumably, Death has no Sting, since Regen is the more defensive ability.

 

Unless the defender has an Absolutely Impenetrable Force Wall, of course.

 

Your mistake here is that what you quoted were outlines of the character's Absolute Ability, not their Absolute Ability itself, which I did not contruct for every single example idea.

 

To understand how conflict amongst Absolute Abilities is resolved, you need to read the section called "V)Absolute versus Absolute"

 

Not bad...instead of paying 120 points for 3/4 Damage Reduction from physical and energy attacks (itself an absolute which has some issues), he paid 75 points for absolute immunity. Now he doesn't need a high CON, since his need for REC is reduced, and his need for STUN and CON itself eliminated, so he pays some of the 75 point cost by taking lower CON and more by selling back STUN from his STR. And he doesn't have to buy up his defenses either.

 

Are you trying to say that it needs to cost more? I could believe that may be true. Doesn't prove the that goal is invalid, of course.

 

As Treb says, there is a reason this proposal is not getting a warm reception from experienced Hero gamers. Note that we think posting your idea on the Hero web site is an invitation for us to criticize it if we consider it problematic. I also think your defensiveness when it is suggested this is not a good idea indicates you didn't really want the idea criticized. If you still consider it workable, implement it in your game and see how it flies. Let us know the results of your playtest.

 

Actually I want constructive criticism, and you came up with a few. The problem was, at first I was only getting an attack on my goals.

 

Thanks

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

Obviously you've never read any Karl Marx.

 

Should I?

 

Seriously, though, my point was that whether adding Absolutes to Hero System adds something valuable to the game is, I think, in the eye of the beholder.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

Sindyr

 

It is difficult to suggest radical changes to the basis of the game when you have a reputation here, it is almost impossible to have such a radical change considered when you are new and you don't reference the current accepted way of achieving in-game absolute abilities if not in-system absolutes.

 

To be fair, I wasn't suggesting that the entire game be changed, just asking for some help adding a new tool to the toolkit in the games *I* will be running and playing in. That's not so offensive is it?

 

You have had a pretty rough first few posts but the people you are talking to have had this argument quite a few times and the temptation is to jump immediately to the position you have developed over the past arguments. Have you looked round the boards for previous examples? If nothing else it would have prepared you for the very arguments you are getting now.

 

I did look, but my search fu is weak, I'll admit - if anyone has links where the methods to achieve general absolutes (not just for one power) are discussed, I am eager to read them, and thank you.

 

The accepted way to have absolutes in HERO is for the referee to indicate the top level attack or defence that he will allow in the game and then cost what an appropriate counter to that would cost. THAT is the cost of your absolute power - it is absolute (in that game, at that power level) for an appropriate cost to the game. It is as simple as you can get and remains true to the system.

 

For the fourth or fifth time, I have read and understood that, but the tool I am looking to add to my toolkit does more than that. It would be helpful I think to the thread is everyone on it embraces the truth that I have understood the option you describe above, and found that it doesn't meet the needs of the reason I started this thread. Thanks.

 

If you, as GM agree to competing absolutes then you can decide what happens. Personally I would not allow more than one person at a time to have any absolute or its counter and heroes compete over them...

 

Doc

 

The way the Absolute Ability system is being designed, the nature of the Absolute Abilities themselves will determine how any seeming conflict amongst them works out. In other words, in this system, its very hard to have two Absolute Abilities truly precisely contradicting each other in the same moment and manner.

 

Thanks again.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

Did you read my post?

 

Doc

 

Sorry, I am only one man, and everyone is talking to me at once. Sometimes it takes extra time to reply to everyone. I have now responded.

 

Please, no one get offended if it takes me a day or two (or sometimes more) to find the time to read and reply to all the messages on this thread. And to try not to spam the thread, I am trying also in a reply to one person, to address issues that all have raised, so while because of time considerations I may not be able to address each and every post specifically, I will be addressing all the issues raised precisely.

 

Thanks.

[Utech]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

The FH solution seems best to me.

 

If the character has purchased enough (whatever) to have an absolute value in a given game world, there's no need to go farther. The character will never leave that world and so never encounter a situation in which the compact is broken.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

Hmm, so if the OCV/DCV cap of the campaign is 13 and the GM allows himself a 2 point edge for 'special cases' then an OCV of 22 would always hit on an 18 or less, the call then the Absolute version a 25 OCV, reversing it a 22 DCV would only be hit on a 3 with the highest Villian OCV (15) so call a 25 DCV. Allow the players to purchase these absolutes higher if they wish (maybe up to +5 or 30 in this example) but they only need to roll if 2 'absolutes' collide.

 

Marksman: I aways hit!

Avoiditron: I'm never hit!

GM: Looks like Marksman finally need to roll.

Avoiditron: I dodge?

 

It only requires a minor house rule of not needing to roll when you've overwhelming advantage. That seems better than my % of points idea from earlier. Although % does answer the 'I don't have enough points/I have so many points issues'

 

I need a universal system that not only answers the above issue, but also the teleporter who wants infinite range and/or infinite penatratibility.

 

In short, there are many good ways within the system to design individual absolutes, but my goal on this thread is coming up with a universal Absolute system that handles all such requests in a unified manner.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

I need a universal system that not only answers the above issue, but also the teleporter who wants infinite range and/or infinite penatratibility.

 

In short, there are many good ways within the system to design individual absolutes, but my goal on this thread is coming up with a universal Absolute system that handles all such requests in a unified manner.

 

You are not going to get it without skewing point balance (which is at the heart of HERO).

 

If you want a cost for infinite damage then the answer, in HERO terms, is infinte points. Otherwise you want to cost by campaign - so, as has been suggested, cost an absolute power at some proportion of the character cost that is going to dissuade a player for opting for more than one at a time.

 

So, you will not get a fixed cost but a cost fixed by campaign. I would suggest 1/3 of points, so if the GM says you have 350 points to spend and you want an absolute ability then he writes that absolute ability on your character sheet and you have 240 points left to spend on everything else.

 

Doc

[jtelson]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

I need a universal system that not only answers the above issue, but also the teleporter who wants infinite range and/or infinite penatratibility.

 

In short, there are many good ways within the system to design individual absolutes, but my goal on this thread is coming up with a universal Absolute system that handles all such requests in a unified manner.

 

You set the maximum allowable range, (Anywhere on Earth, Earth to Moon, Within the Galaxy etc) add +X (2-5) levels and it becomes infinite range.

 

You set the maximum allowable penetration add +X levels and it becomes always penetrates.

 

The idea is universal and it scales. It does require you to define campaign limits a little more rigorously than you may have normally but if you are allowing absolutes you should have wanted to do that anyway.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

As some of the same issues keep rearing their head again and again, let me try to be as effective as I can be in addressing them:

 

A) People keep suggesting that the solution to my problem is creating upper limits to the universe, which will make the character the best.

This has two problems: first, it doesn't let the player teleport to anyplace, regardless of range (unless I make sure the universe is small enough). Second, this "solution" has the qualities of fixing a hole in a table by recommending that the table user place their drink elsewhere. Changing the whole universe to ensures absolutes is way to kludgey for me.

 

If this suggestion is made in the future, I will simply refer to this as the "Fix the Universe Instead of the Character" solution, without having to type out the same response each time the suggestion is made.

 

People keep suggesting that Hero System works fine without Absolutes. However, that is a matter of opinion, and mine is that the Hero System is becoming my ultimate toolkit for running or playing Supers, and as such, I want it to be able to deliver on any request - I don't want my response to a player to be "well, this game didn't come with that tool to build that, so I guess you can't" fallacy.

 

If this suggestion is made in the future, since the suggester is in fact claiming that the fact that they do not use or want such a thing means that I have no reason to pursue it, I will refer to it as the "People should only want to game like me" fallacy.

 

C) People keep suggesting that the system as implemented is too complicated, and therefor not worth pursuing. However, this is false on two fronts, firstly, the unspoken assumption that there is no simpler way to do accomplish the goals, and secondly, that a complex solution invalidates the goals - if that were true, Hero System wouldn't be here.

 

If this is brought up in the future, I will refer to it as the "The solution is Complex, the question must be wrong" fallacy.

 

D) People keep saying that if two Absolute Abilities come into conflict with each other, it's possible that one will trump the other, which means the other isn't Absolute at all, which means that Absolutes aren't even possible. However, this too is a fallacy. The Absolutes I am designing are *mechanical* Absolutes, that can cause something to be Absolutely true when other Absolutes are not in play. The fact that when two Absolutes are in play that one may trump the other has not effect on the Absolute continuing to function as a *mechanical* Absolute. People making this mistake are confusing the wider use of the word Absolute with the precise use of it in game mechanic terms as I am employing it. It's like saying that anyone who isn't free is a slave, and anyone who has a job isn't free. It's a contextual mistake.

 

If this is brought up in the future, I will refer to this as the "It's a game, not a dictionary" fallacy, on account of people expecting Absolute Abilities to be more than just a game mechanic.

 

This is all I can think of now, will add others as they I see repetitious subjects arise.

 

Thanks all.

[Markdoc]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

The way the Absolute Ability system is being designed, the nature of the Absolute Abilities themselves will determine how any seeming conflict amongst them works out. In other words, in this system, its very hard to have two Absolute Abilities truly precisely contradicting each other in the same moment and manner.

 

So in essence, you want absolutes that aren't actually absolute?

 

This is the core of this argument, I think. If you allow actual absolutes, then you also allow paradoxes. If - as you have done - you build a system for ranking absolutes, then they are not absolute - at which point it's not celar what the utility is.

 

To take your own example, with the teleporter who wants to teleport anywhere - if someone (anyone) builds a forcewall that cannot be teleported though, then you still have to tell him "no".

 

So it looks like you've gone to a great deal of trouble and introduced potential balance issues for ...... well, for nothing, really. You still don't have absolutes, you still have relative levels of power. You've just expanded the upper end of that power.

 

In the end, if you want absolutes in game, then you have to accept that it's always going to be a GM fiat deal and then live the paradoxes.

 

In your situation, a Teleporter who "can teleport anywhere" simply needs teleport, megascale +5, which gives him the range to go anywhere in the galaxy, or a minimum of 1 km. Stacked in a multipower with personal teleport that lets him go up to 1 km the character can now "teleport anywhere" and it doesn't even cost that much (minimum of 12 points for the long-range power). That's without any kludges about absolute effects and it plays well with all the rules. (of course, like any teleport with that kind of range, it doesn't explain how he's going to find a place to teleport to, but if he can, he can go there)

 

There's a point here: many of the "absolute powers" discussed can be built using the rules as is. Your stated goal, an

universal Absolute system that handles all such requests in a unified manner.

is unattainable. No such thing can be built (in Hero, or any system) because more than one total absolute can't exist: this paradox has been recognised for thousands of years (or on the Hero board for several years )

 

cheers, Mark

[jtelson]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

A) People keep suggesting that the solution to my problem is creating upper limits to the universe, which will make the character the best.

This has two problems: first, it doesn't let the player teleport to anyplace, regardless of range (unless I make sure the universe is small enough). Second, this "solution" has the qualities of fixing a hole in a table by recommending that the table user place their drink elsewhere. Changing the whole universe to ensures absolutes is way to kludgey for me.

 

If this suggestion is made in the future, I will simply refer to this as the "Fix the Universe Instead of the Character" solution, without having to type out the same response each time the suggestion is made.

 

Just to make sure you understand, everytime you start a hero campaign one of the defaults is that you define campaign limits for players and that the suggestion that's being made is that by exceeding the defined limit by a set amount the character is then able to use the ability as an absolute and not just as defined by the points.

[Trebuchet]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

I don't want my response to a player to be "well' date=' this game didn't come with that tool to build that, so I guess you can't" fallacy.[/quote']Do you really anticipate that your players will ask you for an Absolute ability? Does the idea of saying "No" to a player cause you so much terror that you have to anticipate accommodating anything they might even remotely ask for? (Although I strongly suspect your real intent here is to create abilities which can always defeat your opponents; be they player or GM. You want a trump to anything.) There are already plenty of system-legal combinations in Hero that should seldom if ever be permitted because they are unbalancing. Congratulations; you've now created one that by definition will be unbalancing.

 

Have at it, man. All I can say is thank God I'm not in a campaign with you as a player or as GM.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

The answer is to tell him "If you purchase X levels of AP on your Teleport power' date=' then this will penetrate the maximum levels of Hardened I will permit in this game. As such, I will guarantee that Teleport cannot, under any circumstances, be blocked in this game.[/quote']

 

As far as I can see, this is another form of the "Fix the Universe Instead of the Character" fallacy, which I address at several points on this thread, and specifically here:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1679263&posted=1#post1679263

 

Now let me pose a counter-question. You have now allowed the unblockable teleport. Player B wants to be able to Block it. Presumably, telling him that he either can’t afford it or that worse it’s not permitted is still the wrong way to GM. So what's your answer to Player B, remembering that Player A must have his unblockable teleport? One of the two cannot have what he wants.

 

As far as I can see, this is another form of the "It's a game, not a dictionary" fallacy, which I address at several points on this thread, and specifically here:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1679263&posted=1#post1679263

 

 

To put in other words, my goal is to give the player that requests it an Absolute Ability, which can be counted on to be Absolute at *least* if no other Absolute Ability is in play.

 

 

I think perhaps my choice of the word "Absolute" is getting people confused, maybe I should have called them Ultra Abilities?

 

I see nothing wrong with telling a player either he can't afford something or is not permitted to have something. If we're playing a 25 + 25 low Fantasy game and you want to know how to have a character with a 6d6 Explosive KA Fireball, you can't afford it. It isn't in the games parameters. If you want to know how to have a Vulcan starship commander, my answer is that it's not permitted - that's not in the context of this game.

 

At the extreme, someone may want a character who "always wins in combat". That's an absolute. Is it a character that we want in our games? Likely not, so my answer is "No, you can't afford it and even if you could it would not be permitted." If I'm OK with it being in this game, then we work up a construct, and a cost, that makes it do-able.

 

As far as I can see, this is another form of the ""People should only want to game like me" fallacy, which I address at several points on this thread, and specifically here:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1679263&posted=1#post1679263

 

I have been very clear (I think) as to what my goals here is - I want to know *how* to do this, not *if* I should.

 

Teleport is already scalable. The player who wants to "teleport any distance" needs to look at Megascale. He will still have a limited distance, but assuming I want such a power in my game, will be able to teleport anywhere that has any meaning to the game.

 

"He will still have a limited distance" - then it doesn't help me achieve my goals, does it?

 

This is just a different form of adder. And the math doesn't work, as already shown. You want to Teleport anywhere, so you pay 50 points. How is that fair to the character who paid 100 points for a Teleport power that travels far less distance?

 

I am not saying that my implementation is perfect or done. If you have a better way to accomplish *my* goals, I would love to hear it. Of course, even if you don't, I appreciate you pointing things like the above out, and I will take that under advisement.

 

One quick thing I just noticed, Teleporting anywhere is NOT 50 points, even by my pre-Alpha of a system, is it? Where did I say that? I think it would actually cost:

 

1.Starting cost, 50 points.

2.The ability’s general effect is to move the character and from his current location to another chosen location.

3.No special limitations.

4.The Ability is Absolute with respect to Range, the user can use any number for range without limit.

5.The GM rates the scope and nature of this at an appropriate level, perhaps +¾

6. 50 x (1+ ¾) = 87.5 points for teleporting without any specific range limit. Note you still have to buy TP with any costs for it for non range options.

 

The one described in FH, while arguably no simpler, works as well as any absolute can be expected to. You want to be affected by no possible adverse result? The cost should be remarkably close to that of enough defenses against all possible adverse results (PD, ED, Damage Resistance, Flash Def, Power Def, Mental Def, Lack of Weakness and Life Support - doubtless I missed some) to be immune to every possible adverse effect. No, you probably can't afford it. Most 150 point characters can't afford to spend 150 points on a single aspect of their character. No 100 point character can. Tough - you want a concept that is overpowered compared to your teammates.

 

I suspect most absolutes that are not so powerful can be made to fit the FH Absolute Effects structure at a more reasonable cost.

 

I guess that means FH does not accomplish my goals - perhaps we can now leave FH behind?

 

If I'm playing 1,000 point Galactic Champions? Well, I think I'd like an attack that Always Hits (+2) and Always Destroys Utterly (+2), so that's 250 points, plus 150 for "Utterly immune to all adverse effects, plus a 250 point "go anywhere, not blockable" movement power and a 250 point "sense anywhere, not blocakble" sensory ability. Now, what should I do with my remaining 100 points? This is shaping up to be a really fun game with every PC taking the above with one SFX or another.

 

This is the "straw man" fallacy. It does not demonstrate that people who want absolutes in their superhero games are wrong.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

I like it (at least as a house rule).

 

I would probably have made two Absolutes in conflict, that they would cancel each other out and resolve normally. But, that's my preference and a matter of style.

 

The next step is to playtest the rules with your players and see if they love it or hate it and why.

 

Yup, although there have been some really good criticisms about maybe some of the point costing being too cheap. I will have to think about that.

 

Thanks for the encouraging words.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

Actually, it's called (appropriately enough) the Absolute Effects Rule.

 

Fantasy Hero p250-251 discusses it at length. With luck this whole section will make it into 6E in some form.

 

Others in this thread have gone over the basic premise. But the Rule shifts from Game To Game, has no real set point cost and is mostly a cooperative contract between all the people at the table.

 

I will of course do my due dilligence and go read it, but as I understand it, it doesn't fulfill my goals as it is not a character ability, but a world limit.

 

The reason many of us look at this as a generalized bad idea is through numerous discussions on the topic over the years. And some playtesting.

 

Absolute Effects with any kind of set cost do not scale well, and generally interact badly with gaming elements.

 

That said many of us have implemented Effective Absolutes in our games with some good results - and some bad.

 

I am not unmindful of the potential pitfalls, nor of the realities of character point economy, and that no spends more when they can get more for less.

 

I will be keeping a sharp eye on that, particularly with regard to powers that yield either Absolute Offense or Absolute Defense.

 

Also - as a side note - it would have been better if you'd utilized Hero Mechanics Game Terms in your OP instead of the language did use. We have a whole host of terms that cover what you're talking about that could have probably presented the idea better to us Mechanically in a Game Language we speak.

 

This makes me feel stupid and kick myself for making the conversation harder than it needed to be. Would you give me some examples, so that I can become educated and shift to the more appropriate for this venue terminology?

 

Thanks.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

OK. How about this for your game. Absolute is a 50 point adder. You purchase at least 50 points of a power and then you purchase the Absolute Adder for that. That power is then Absolute. If it is an Energy Blast affecting PD then it will ignore all PD that is not also purchased as Absolute.

 

If you have an absolute movement power then it will trump any non absolute movement power.

 

If you have an absolute skill then it will achieve its aim unless thwarted by an absolute obstacle.

 

This way you put a fifty point premium on absolute powers. If they come up against other absolute powers then the system works as normal with, for example, the energy blast counting points against the PD.

 

Now I have arbitrarily put the cost of an absolute power as 100 points (50 points of normal ability plus the absolute adder) You could make the buy in cost anything you think balanced and the cost of the adder the same.

 

If you want lots of superheroes to breeze past normals and normal attacks then a couple of absolute defences would be necessary and you might want to change the effects to something like a +2 advantage. That way you get lots of little absolute powers that mean that normal people are not an issue at all but the thought would have to be that you would be competing against villains who would also potentially have absolute powers, so the 1 absolute PD you have that allows you to ignore bullets is nothing against Grond with his absolute 80 STR.

 

More useful?

 

 

Doc

 

Useful and very very interesting. I was heading in this direction myself, but I ran into a snag.

 

Take Teleportation. If I spend 100 total points for Absolute Teleportation, do I get Absolute Range *and* Absolute Penetration? What if I only want one to be absolute? It seems to me that there should be a price differential between a Teleporter that has both Absolutes and one that noy has one.

 

Additionally, what about scope issues? Specifically, I want a character that Absolutely cannot be harmed by Fire. Someone else wants a character that Absolutely cannot be harmed by any Energy attack, including Fire. These two people should also be paying differing points.

 

Finally, what about an Absolute Ability that is not governed by an existing power? Not sure if I can come up with one off the top of my head... say Infinite Intelligence? Or being unkillable? (But still taking damage) There needs to be some way to add in Absolutes that have no ruling power. Course these could have a set cost.

 

I like the way your are thinking, and look forward to your response.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

Most of us feel your absolutes are not good gaming' date=' so why waste energy "making them work"? [/quote']

 

Fine, just also don't waste energy coming in here being a wet blanket.

 

Or to put another way, you are obviously putting energy into posting, why not try to be helpful?

 

If you read the posts they're actually VERY constructive. They explain in detail why this is a bad idea.

 

Not so much. Most of the posts say little more than "Absolutes Bad! Must Smash!." A much smaller number point out some issues with my implementation of a solutions. Not a single post here has demonstrated (or even tried to) why it's wrong for my gaming group to try to add a feature we want to our toolkit for gaming.

 

Probably because that would be like berating someone for liking pistachio because everyone else likes chocolate.

 

In other words, dumb.

 

So you're saying that because you spent 500 points, it should trump anything even if the other guy spent a 1000 points? How does that possibly make sense? They way things are now, generally speaking, the person who has more power (spent more points) wins. That doesn't seem like a fair way of doing things?

 

No, that's what *you* are saying. I fully expect ALL character to take advantage of the Absolute Ability system, to the extent they want to or should. And don't forget, the more points you have, the more Absolute you could potentially be. I haven't ruled out the possibility that a player with Doubly Absolute Defense could trump a Singly Absolute Offense - but don't go nuclear and off on a tangent, this is only a PROTO idea, and not yet part of any implementation.

 

I don't EVER want to play with a GM who won't tell a player no. That's just a recipie for disaster, but okay we'll play it this way. Tell me how you arbitrait the following scenario:

 

Player A wants a power where he can Teleport through anything.

Player B wants a Force Wall nothing can get through.

 

Which player do you plan on disappointing?

 

I never promised that either gets to be the best, just that they can trump any non-Absolute systems.

 

Think of it this way, if someone wants to trump badly enough, he sinks a LOT of points into getting an Absolute Ability. The same for the defender.

 

So the question is, does the character want to sacrifice spending the points on many other powers to be nigh unstoppable in one, or would the character rather have a wider assortment of options? Who wants it more badly? And unlike the current system, this Absolute system has a minimum entry cost. It's not like saying, how many levels of Hardened can I afford, it's more about committing to an idea because you can't do it halfway.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

That's a philosophical difference more than anything. I do understand where you're coming from; I just don't see any need for (and lots of reasons to dislike) such a capability in a role-playing game.

 

Actually, I can demonstrate the need for it: Me and my gaming group want this tool in our toolkit. This is again the "People should only want to game like me" fallacy.

 

There's no precedent I'm aware of for this kind of absolute in the source material and it creates a host of problems in a role playing game; the largest of which is it creates tremendous problems for the GM to create a suitable challenge to characters possessing such Absolute abilities as you've proposed. You've left it no Achilles heel; no flaws for those characters who lack some sort of Absolute to exploit. (Even Superman had kryptonite.) That's inevitably going to mean that the only realistic way to challenge such a character is going to be another character with an Absolute; meaning these kinds of conflicts are probably going to be a lot more common that you seem to think they will be. It's not a problem for the GM who has infinite points to design bad guys; but it's going to be a major one for players. If you actually playtest this in a campaign I think you'll find it far more problematical than you expect.

 

I am open to that being proven to me in playtesting. However, I can think of at least one good response - if a character in invulnerable, simply don't run a game that depends on him being NOT so. Instead, threaten those around him, threaten his principles, make it be about character growth, not fisticuffs, or the challenge of inspiring others to fight back. In fact, there are so many ways in good drama that power can be a weakness, that I am not sure why this would be a problem.

 

Think of this another way. A player takes true and Absolute Invulnerability - that player is telling the GM, either consciously or not, that the struggle to survive is NOT what the play wants to experience in the game. So make his part of the game about something else.

 

We can game more deeply than just bar-room brawls.

 

If you're bound and determined to use this in your game, then I think the idea upthread of having it be a percentage of total character points rather than a fixed cost has a lot of merit. 33% or 50% of total character points seems about right.

 

In the meantime, keep the ideas coming. Just because we didn't like this one doesn't mean you won't have the next Great Idea.

 

I love that you ended on a positive note - bless your heart. I have not rules out the cost of a percentage, although that makes the same power cost different for different characters. I also have the issue of charging different point for absolutes with different scopes.

 

But thank you for the continuing feedback.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

Take Teleportation. If I spend 100 total points for Absolute Teleportation' date=' do I get Absolute Range *and* Absolute Penetration? What if I only want one to be absolute? It seems to me that there should be a price differential between a Teleporter that has both Absolutes and one that noy has one.[/quote']

 

It's up to you. You are in Sindyrland now - you are in control!

 

You could say that absolute teleport has all of these things. Or you might say choose either and then require an extra 25 points for each extra component.

 

Additionally' date=' what about scope issues? Specifically, I want a character that Absolutely cannot be harmed by Fire. Someone else wants a character that Absolutely cannot be harmed by any Energy attack, including Fire. These two people should also be paying differing points.[/quote']

 

So charge the 100 points for a specific absolute ability and the extra 25 points for the general absolute.

 

Finally' date=' what about an Absolute Ability that is not governed by an existing power? Not sure if I can come up with one off the top of my head... say Infinite Intelligence? Or being unkillable? (But still taking damage) There needs to be some way to add in Absolutes that have no ruling power. Course these could have a set cost.[/quote']

 

If it isn't covered by an existing power then you are looking at having a new power created - more trouble than is worth considering now - what if you decide not to do it with HERO? Not worth considering either...

 

 

Doc

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

There have actually been several suggestions about how to make it work, it's just that apparently the idea that absolutes should be scalable is unacceptable.

 

The problem is that non-scaling absolutes of the nature being discussed leads to poor game balance and is contrary to the stated assumption that these abilities would be rare and interact infrequently.

 

I am not sure what "scalable absolute" means, could you say more about this?

 

The reason that conflicts would be rare is because I don't imagine a lot of NPCs wasting points on Absolutes when they can just exploit a different angle. And I don't think most players will pursue it, though I want the option available. Ultimately, I actually don't expect the system to get much use, apart from a handful of PCs and NPCs. (Apart from playtesting, that is.)

 

And the reason that they will interact infrequently is that the majority of the time they will not be triggerred in the same moment on the same target.

[sindyr]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

The FH solution seems best to me.

 

If the character has purchased enough (whatever) to have an absolute value in a given game world, there's no need to go farther. The character will never leave that world and so never encounter a situation in which the compact is broken.

 

Awesome, then you should use the FH solution.

 

However, I still need to accomplish my stated goal, as the FH solution does not seem best to me.

[jtelson]

Re: New option: Absolute Abilties, help please

 

I am not sure what "scalable absolute" means, could you say more about this?

 

The reason that conflicts would be rare is because I don't imagine a lot of NPCs wasting points on Absolutes when they can just exploit a different angle. And I don't think most players will pursue it, though I want the option available. Ultimately, I actually don't expect the system to get much use, apart from a handful of PCs and NPCs. (Apart from playtesting, that is.)

 

And the reason that they will interact infrequently is that the majority of the time they will not be triggerred in the same moment on the same target.

 

Feelin a bit invisible.

 

Scalable absolutes are what I've been talking about since post 5 in the thread. Absolutes either costed as a % or based on Campaign Limits (Based on Campaign Linits is not about changing the universe it's about using the default system(s)/guidelines for campaign creation; If you do not wish to do that it should have been made clear)

 

Setting flat costs means that something expensive in a 250 pt campaign is cheap in a 500 point one. The absolute abilities actually gain utility as the campaign scales up.