Elemental Controls

[Snarf]

I'm trying to start a campaign which uses a lot of Elemental Controls and I was wondering what more experienced Hero players thought of them.

 

Why do ECs require things placed in them to cost endurance and under what conditions would you make an expception to this requirement?

 

How do you handle defensive powers? It seems like if you bought a big EC, you would be forced to buy unusually high amounts of defense to meet the cost minimums. In a campaign where most powers are bought through elemental controls, nobody would be able to affect anybody.

 

How do you handle characteristics placed in an EC? Do you normally just avoid this? Do you take No Figured Characteristics? Do you ignore the normal super-heroic characteristic limit of 40?

[OddHat]

Re: Elemental Controls

 

Originally posted by Snarf

I'm trying to start a campaign which uses a lot of Elemental Controls and I was wondering what more experienced Hero players thought of them.

 

Why do ECs require things placed in them to cost endurance and under what conditions would you make an expception to this requirement?

 

At a guess, I'd say that it's to prevent characters from placing all of their stats in an EC:Superhuman Physiology. Could be more than a bit unballancing, even if it did make them incredibly vulnerable to power drains. Also, you could get double the Flash Def, Power Def, and Mental Def by building a special defences EC. Some GMs won't mind, but again it looks unballanced to me.

 

I don't think I would make an exception per-se, but I would let a construction like Total Life Support / Mental Def / Power Def / Whatever + Costs End be placed in an EC.

 

Originally posted by Snarf

How do you handle defensive powers? It seems like if you bought a big EC, you would be forced to buy unusually high amounts of defense to meet the cost minimums. In a campaign where most powers are bought through elemental controls, nobody would be able to affect anybody.

 

Correct. So don't allow it. If you do, make them take the Costs End limitation, which means that their super defenses have to be turned on, can't be kept on all the time, shut down when they're stunned, etc. Of course they could buy 0 End Persistant, but then that would just use up the points they thought they were saving in the first place.

 

Originally posted by Snarf

How do you handle characteristics placed in an EC? Do you normally just avoid this? Do you take No Figured Characteristics? Do you ignore the normal super-heroic characteristic limit of 40?

 

I don't normally permit it; if I did, I'd require the player to take Costs End and No Figured Characteristics.

[Blue]

The only time I let a 0 END power in an EC is if it is something linked to a power that uses END (and the player can justify it being in an EC), or if the power itself is so small or inconsequential that I just waive the rule.

[Snarf]

I notice there's a 20 PD, 15 ED, 0 END force field in the 5'th Edition EC examples of all places. The cost came out to 27 points.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Snarf

I notice there's a 20 PD, 15 ED, 0 END force field in the 5'th Edition EC examples of all places. The cost came out to 27 points.

 

Different issue. Unless I'm majorly spacing on the rules, powers bought to 0 End in ECs are fine. It's inherently 0 End powers (LS, Power Def, Mental Def, etc.) and Characteristics that shouldn't be placed in ECs. A FF allows you to place defences in your EC, even if you buty the force field down to 0 End.

[Snarf]

The only difference between that force field and armor is that it's not persistent. Do you think a lack of persistance is the most important requirement?

[Blue]

Assuming they built hero designer correctly, I can go there and build a power, take it down to 0 END, and it accepts it without a warning message, whereas you get the warning message when you try to put something into an EC that is inherently 0 END. [shrug]

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Snarf

The only difference between that force field and armor is that it's not persistent. Do you think a lack of persistance is the most important requirement?

 

Probably yes. That said, I'd still require No Figured Characteristics if someone wanted to buy Non-Persistant characteristics in their EC, and if they decided that they wanted non-persistant Armor in an EC I'd ask them to take a FF; they're looking for a double dip point break from both the non-persistant limit on the Armor and the discount from the EC.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

Probably yes. That said, I'd still require No Figured Characteristics if someone wanted to buy Non-Persistant characteristics in their EC, and if they decided that they wanted non-persistant Armor in an EC I'd ask them to take a FF; they're looking for a double dip point break from both the non-persistant limit on the Armor and the discount from the EC.

 

If the SFX justify it, I'd permit armor in an AC. +10/+10 Force Field 0 End is the same cost, so there's no real cost break. If he wants to add Persistent, he has to add Always On first, so the force field winds up cheaper than armor anyway.

 

Technically, if I buy my Armor (or any other defense) "costs End only to activate", it's legal in the EC.

 

Personally, I don't see the huge abuse that requiring all EC powers to cost END is preventing. I can have an Aid, for example, in my EC if I make it cost END. I can have an EB reduced to 0 END. So why force the Aid to cost END?

 

As for the DEF/Attack quandry, my experience is that players generally take the EC to the lower total (eg. their defenses and movement power) and spend extra for an attack power, if they have an attack power in the EC at all. Far more common is an EC with no attack powers and a multipower for attacks if the player wants some versatlity. Multiple attack powers in an EC are not cost effective.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Personally, I don't see the huge abuse that requiring all EC powers to cost END is preventing.

 

If we're ever in the same campaign I'll be sure to put all of my characteristics, power defense, mental defense, flash defense, life support, damage reductions, and an enhanced sense or two in an EC then. I could use the extra 200 points or so.

 

As to the Persistant requires Always On thing, Steve Long recently mentioned that that may be dropped; certainly there are examples of it not being applied in examples given in FREd and published characters. Regeneration comes to mind (FRED p.120). Even if you did permit the Always On to be applied to the FF, you'd need to ask how exactly that was actually causing trouble for the character. A limit that doesn't cause problems is worth no points.

[Snarf]

On a related topic, do you follow the 5'th edition recommended defense caps? If I allowed 60 APs worth of Force Field, that would be 30 resistant PD and ED.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Snarf

On a related topic, do you follow the 5'th edition recommended defense caps? If I allowed 60 APs worth of Force Field, that would be 30 resistant PD and ED.

 

I don't, but your campaign your rules. I can see why it's there; keeping characters vulnerable speeds combat. OTOH there are a few reasonable character concepts that are more complicated to put together under a 60 AP limit on defenses.

[Snarf]

Oh, I'm not talking about the 60 AP limit. I'm talking about the far more restrictive 10 point resistant, 20 point non-resistant limit. The one that guarantees an attack will always draw blood

 

I think I'm just going to buy the control low most of the time, unless the EC powers are almost all attack powers.

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Snarf

Oh, I'm not talking about the 60 AP limit. I'm talking about the far more restrictive 10 point resistant, 20 point non-resistant limit. The one that guarantees an attack will always draw blood

 

That? Blank it.

 

Besides, their own sample 350 point super-heroes ignore that. Check out the current Champions (Champions, p.181-192). 3 out of 5 have over 10 rPD.

[Kintara]

Personally, when it comes to defenses, I don't see abuse in allowing them to be bought to the AP limit. It's balanced because there is Power Defense, Flash Defense, Mental Defense, and nearly infinite NND Defenses. Not to mention that you can Drain or Suppress defenses, use Penetrating/Armor Piercing attacks, and Find Weaknesses.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

If we're ever in the same campaign I'll be sure to put all of my characteristics, power defense, mental defense, flash defense, life support, damage reductions, and an enhanced sense or two in an EC then. I could use the extra 200 points or so.

 

That abuse is much easier prevented - show me the tightly knit special effects that bind all these powers together. There's no such thing, for example, as "EC: Defenses".

 

It is also noteworthy that I may only buy these powers if "they take the limitation costs END or the GM permits it". So? I can't buy any power if the GM doesn't permit it. Just hang a stop sign over the construct and be done with it!

 

Enhanced senses, you say? Why, Steve's discussion on FREd 204 suggests an EC would commonly have a sensory power (but likely only one per EC). I wonder which ones he's referring to, since very few cost END.

 

By the way, Flash, Power and Mental Defense, as well as Enhanced Senses, are all Special Powers that require GM permission in any power construct (just like powers costing no END in an EC). Note that power, mental and flash defense could all be purchased as part of a force field, which also grants resistant defenses, so no need for damage resistance. Make it 0 END (and maybe always on) and you have your special defenses.

 

And forcing them all to cost END hardly seems the solution to this problem. So I make them cost END (maybe only to start up) and buy all my powers that would otherwise cost END to reduced/0 END to compensate. So Aid was legit if it cost END, but since it was changed to incorporate "0 END", it's no longer appropriate? Yet I can buy an EB and reduce it to 0 END. Maybe I should be allowed to buy Life Support Costs END, 0 END. It's a stupid construct, obviously.

 

A force field with multiple extra defenses tossed in also gets around another issue with EC's - if you put in powers that are very low cost, you eliminate the benefit on higher cost items. An EC with 10 points flash defense, a 75 point attack power and a couple of 50 point powers [extreme example] is horribly inefficient. Total cost 5 + 5 + 70 + 45 + 45 = 170 points. Take out the Flash Defense and buy it separately, and pay 25 + 50 + 25 +25 + 10 = 135 points. And no, you can't have a slot for "10 Mental Defense, 10 Power Defense, 10 Flash Defense, 10 Lack of Weakness and 10/10 Damage Resistance" to force it to cost 50 points.

 

No point putting multiple attacks in an EC either. Let's say you already have a 60 point power in your EC, and you want some attacks. Three attacks costs 90 points. A multipower with three Ultra attacks costs 78. Neither construct allows multiple power attacks (absent special GM permission - there's that "GM permits it" business again). You could mix & match if your multi uses regular slots, but that's 96 points (oooo...+6 to be allowed to mix & match - a +1/15 advantage!). Make it 5 attacks, and we get 150 in the EC, 90 in the multi or 120 in the multi with mix & match potential. And this ignores the fact the attack generally costs more than the other EC powers, so it generally does cost more than 50% its usual cost.

 

The EC works best for non-attack powers, or where the character will only have one or two attack powers (and some big related powers).

 

Funny you should mention life support, by the way. As a power costing as much as 50 points, it would be a nice one to get a point break on. Given its general utility as compared with, say, a 50 point attack power or a 50 point defensive power, it seems legit that you could get a point bvreak somewhere. Mind you, in my campaigns, players have generally purchased life support because they needed it for their character's conception, not sought out conceptions that justified life support. FTL travel is another, although it's less expensive.

 

Can EC's be abused? Sure. Is putting a power that costs no END in an EC usually abusive? I don't believe so. Can they be abused with powers that DO cost END? Sure. So why put this special restriction in place for EC's only?

 

As to the Persistant requires Always On thing, Steve Long recently mentioned that that may be dropped; certainly there are examples of it not being applied in examples given in FREd and published characters. Regeneration comes to mind (FRED p.120). Even if you did permit the Always On to be applied to the FF, you'd need to ask how exactly that was actually causing trouble for the character. A limit that doesn't cause problems is worth no points.

 

Regeneration - that would be a persistent power that doesn't cost END, wouldn't it? Sure, it's constructed from a power that normally costs END, but the net effect is that I have a power which, by its nature in the rule books, never costs END.

 

An always on force field is visible to three sense groups. So much for stealth - your crackly force field makes it very difficult to sneak up on people. Disguise yourselves to pass unnoticed? Sorry - you're down to the "trenchcoat and big hat" school of subtlety. And no, you don't get distinctive features for that, any more than anyone with a force field gets an "easily concealed" DF since he can shut it down. Hopefully, you also purchased Immune to Diseases - you're very difficult to innoculate with 15 Resistant PD you can't shut down. Secret ID? I think not! Just off the top of my head. Always On wouldn't be listed as a separate limitation if it didn't commonly cause problems to have powers it applies to unable to be shut down.

[Hugh Neilson]

Oh, I'm not talking about the 60 AP limit. I'm talking about the far more restrictive 10 point resistant, 20 point non-resistant limit. The one that guarantees an attack will always draw blood [/b]

 

ooo...how 4 color!

 

I must have missed that one - I've certainly never seen it applied. Oh, I see it - it's supposed to be an average, not a maximum. I've still never seen average resistant defenses fall that low in a supers campaign (including the standard Hero characters). It's probably good for a gritty, street level structure, or even a structure closer to four color, but where combat is more oriented to death of combatants. Like any other restriction, it depends on the tone and structure of the campaign.

 

6-14 average DC's...4d6 KA vs 10 rDef...not pretty!

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

Besides, their own sample 350 point super-heroes ignore that. Check out the current Champions (Champions, p.181-192). 3 out of 5 have over 10 rPD.

 

Not looking at the book, but I bet they generally spend more than 60 AP on defenses as well. Especially if you consider Regeneration, DCV bonuses and DEX over some number to be "defensive powers".

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

That abuse is much easier prevented - show me the tightly knit special effects that bind all these powers together. There's no such thing, for example, as "EC: Defenses".

 

EC: Android Body, Golem Body, Demonic Physiology, etc.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

It is also noteworthy that I may only buy these powers if "they take the limitation costs END or the GM permits it". So? I can't buy any power if the GM doesn't permit it. Just hang a stop sign over the construct and be done with it!

 

Good suggestion. Agreed.

 

 

(SNIP Stuff that is either very obvious or that I don't particularly disagree with)

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

An always on force field is visible to three sense groups. So much for stealth - your crackly force field makes it very difficult to sneak up on people. Disguise yourselves to pass unnoticed? Sorry - you're down to the "trenchcoat and big hat" school of subtlety. And no, you don't get distinctive features for that, any more than anyone with a force field gets an "easily concealed" DF since he can shut it down. Hopefully, you also purchased Immune to Diseases - you're very difficult to innoculate with 15 Resistant PD you can't shut down. Secret ID? I think not! Just off the top of my head. Always On wouldn't be listed as a separate limitation if it didn't commonly cause problems to have powers it applies to unable to be shut down.

 

So in other words a 0 end persistant Always On Force field is more disadvantageous than Armor in an EC, and your original suggestion that it made no difference was incorrect.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

EC: Android Body, Golem Body, Demonic Physiology, etc.

 

Refer to the FREd comments on "racial EC's". To me, all three of the above imply a racial abilities EC, so the most you could buy will be the minimum expected of all androids/golems/demons. So, unless ALL androids have 10 points flash defense, for example, it comes out of the EC. Personally, I don't associate "android" with "can't be blinded", so it doesn't fit.

 

"EC: Superhuman Powers" and "EC: Alien Powers" would seem as (in)valid, to me, as the constructs you list above. There does not seem to be a link which explains why a single drain would logically affect all of these powers at once. Turning that around, I would have to accept it is legitimate to pay +1/4 to Drain any one Android Power, or +2 to drain them all at once. If it's a common special effect for an EC, it must also be a common special effect for adjustment powers, right?

 

[ASIDE: Shouldn't all those powers pay for Inherent then? They should all be inherent, given they are standard abilities attributable to your physical form. I don't like Inherent much, and given the impact on the adjustment power rules for power frameworks, inherent powers clearly don't belong there. To light a further fire, don't we have Inherent running, and birds have Inherent flight? Aren't all our Characteristics Inherent?]

 

Originally posted by OddHat

So in other words a 0 end persistant Always On Force field is more disadvantageous than Armor in an EC, and your original suggestion that it made no difference was incorrect.

 

Given most of us just look at having the DEF at all times, it's the same basic effect. It is probably more correct to say it makes no significant combat effect (although you will be affected by different NND's, and I think more use force field than armor as the defense).

 

Inside or outside an EC, the bigger question is why a force field costs more points for the same defenses/SFX combination. Armor (or PD/ED + Damage Resistance) is already persistent, and does not require visible special effects. Since it is persistent, arguably it comes with Always On built in (with the same problem it's hard to get an innoculation). Although many of us assume a visible SFX, armor is not inherently Visible unless it Costs END according to the FAQ.

 

An equivalent Force Field needs to be 0 END, persistent and Invisible to all sense groups. Although you get the always on point break, it's still more expensive.

 

10 DEF armor (or 10 resistant PD/ED): 15 points

 

10 DEF Force Field modified per above: 10 x 3/1.5 = 20 points. Why is a force field significantly more expensive for the same effects? Surely not for the sole reason that it can be placed in an elemental control! We don't have a special "costs more" energy blast so it can go in an EC? If only the powers that cost more can go in an EC, why not scrap both concepts?

[OddHat]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Refer to the FREd comments on "racial EC's". To me, all three of the above imply a racial abilities EC, so the most you could buy will be the minimum expected of all androids/golems/demons. So, unless ALL androids have 10 points flash defense, for example, it comes out of the EC. Personally, I don't associate "android" with "can't be blinded", so it doesn't fit.

 

In other words (and also including the snipped material), you'd make a personal call as a GM that such an EC would be abusive. Exactly right, and not much of a surprise as those were explicitly posted as examples of how ECs that permitted characteristics and powers that didn't cost end would be abused. Under your propossed house rules, any munchkin worth his salt would imediately come back with EC:Kryptonian, EC:Bio-Force FIeld, EC: I'm a Frickin' Munchkin, and any number of other constructs that would permit him to jam all of his characteristics and other currently forbidden items into an EC. Yes, you'd overule them, and yes, there will always be rules lawyers. So why not take the official approach and maintain a good solid ruling that such nonsense is forbidden from the beginning?

 

You started off claiming that this type of construct wasn't abusive. Now you admit that it is. Good for you.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by OddHat

You started off claiming that this type of construct wasn't abusive. Now you admit that it is. Good for you.

 

No, I started off saying that simply having powers which do not normally cost END prohibited from being in an EC is excessive. In the right case, I could see any of characteristics, unusual defenses, life support, Aid or enhanced senses fitting the special effects of an EC.

 

I do not see "Characteristics" or "Defenses" (however you sugar coat it) being a valid EC.

 

However, a Light Powers EC could appropriately have Flash Defense. Perhaps a Darkness EC could as well (block the flash w/ darkness). It would not logically provide power defense or mental defense.

 

A heat EC might logically hold Infrared Vision (though I can't see the point setting the base of an EC so low).

 

Many EC's might reasonably hold an Enhanced Sense - Steve alludes to this when he notes a typical EC might have a sensory power.

 

A Speedster's EC may well appropriately include enhanced Speed and/or Dex (DEX gets expensive, since characteristics in a power construct generally provide no figured). Many might properly include Damage Reduction against their special effect, and/or an opposing special effect.

 

Is it improper for Spider-Man's Spider Powers EC to include his "spider sense"? Maybe - you may think it's a strech for spider powers. But it should not be disallowed solely because Danger Sense costs no END (or because it may be a special power; I don't recall if it is).

 

Are these powers truly so overpowered that they should not qualify for the point breaks available to other powers? If they are, maybe their pricing overall should be fixed. I don't believe they are.

[Farkling]

Ah....Frameworks...the best Munchkin territory in HERO.

 

Here's my personal rules for the accepted EC's::

 

1) If you want to put a "Natural No END power" or Characteristics or Funky Defenses in an EC, they cost endurance. No limitation given, and no argument. You may buy reduced END normally, and even make them persistant. Most munchkins realize quickly that this defeats their original point trimming purposes. The additional "activation" necessary for the 0 END powers is a neat effect as far as I'm concerned. A "charging up" or "concentration" of minimal combat effect. This has been occasionally been waived in favor of "natural powers" with heftier limitations.

 

2) They also do NOT boost figured characteristics. You may put those in the EC also however...

 

3) Most of the munchkins have instead opted for Steve's published "affected by drains/suppresses as EC powers" limitation. I think that I have allowed that at a 1/2 level for running both ways... (In the FAQ? On the board? It's on the house rules list in my book, but the book isn't here...)

 

TI've tinkered with his rule in action, and actually seems to work pretty well.

 

MPower Characteristics are already not allowed to add to figured CHAR's and usually require a limitation of some sorts in my design picture. Depends on the character explanation.

[JmOz]

Did I miss a ruling? Just because a power is persistent it should not be Always on (same goes for inherent BTW)

[Farkling]

Right. It's there in the details on page 69. A power that costs END may be bought to 0 END, and then you can buy persistant. If it is persistant, it will stay on even if you are KO'd.... I got some strange looks from a Champs 4 hero group when they blasted the mentalist Clinging to the wall with a large EB, and he passed out but didn't fall. Persistant Clinging...molecular bonding plates. The same trick works with flight. FREd ground shooter blew the villain further up and away, and was shocked when the villain sort of "floated" there, drifting Earthwards. The villain woke up before our hero could find a position to shoot from again. And flew away.

 

Persistant Force Fields and Damage Shields have interesting effects also...persistant Damage Shields simulate "lava forms" or "energy cocoons" that need to be established, yet can be repressed.

 

Let me clarify my EC position...My house rule is that anythings in an EC automatically costs END...there is no limitation. You may buy these powers to 0 END and persistant. Which defeats the purposes of the munchkin, but the concept people see to-may-toes and toe-ma-toes.

 

On the subject of misc oddball defenses (Mental/Power/Flash), your special effects and justification for scores over 20 need to be bloody good in an EC. Concept people...no problem. Munchkins prefer to gnash their teeth at my "changeing the rules"

 

Good Gaming.