CrosshairCollie Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Just fishing for opinions here. The idea is based off how Ratchet (of & Clank fame) seems to work; he seems to pull his weapons out of nowhere (aka subspace pocket), and can instantly put them back and pull out another one. He never gets disarmed (though this is obviously simply because that option was never programmed into the games). This is the way I was thinking it would be built: Tesseract Storage Gauntlet: XXpt Multipower, Restrainable, OIF Gauntlet (slot) (slot) etc. The powers are OIF because they can't be easily disarmed, but they still must be swung (Omniwrench, Plasma Whip) or aimed/fired normally (all the handguns/rifles), hence the Restrainable. The thing is ... this is the same limitation value as OAF, but seems somewhat 'less restrictive' than OAF. Should I go with a 'custom' -3/4, or go with what the rulebook says? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost-angel Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? I don't see too much of a problem with it. OIF is a valid Limitation - if someone spent some time (per the I part) to remove the gauntlet he'd be without his stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? Just fishing for opinions here. The idea is based off how Ratchet (of & Clank fame) seems to work; he seems to pull his weapons out of nowhere (aka subspace pocket), and can instantly put them back and pull out another one. He never gets disarmed (though this is obviously simply because that option was never programmed into the games). This is the way I was thinking it would be built: Tesseract Storage Gauntlet: XXpt Multipower, Restrainable, OIF Gauntlet (slot) (slot) etc. The powers are OIF because they can't be easily disarmed, but they still must be swung (Omniwrench, Plasma Whip) or aimed/fired normally (all the handguns/rifles), hence the Restrainable. The thing is ... this is the same limitation value as OAF, but seems somewhat 'less restrictive' than OAF. Should I go with a 'custom' -3/4, or go with what the rulebook says? I question putting both OIF and Restrainable on the same power...are you sure this shouldn't be one or the other? Lucius Alexander The palindromedary thinks -3/4 would work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper-Man Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? I question putting both OIF and Restrainable on the same power...are you sure this shouldn't be one or the other? Lucius Alexander The palindromedary thinks -3/4 would work Captain America's Shield is a perfect example of both an OIF (it's strapped to one of his arms) and Restrainable (If he is grabbed he can't use the Shield effectively). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrosshairCollie Posted January 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? Captain America's Shield is a perfect example of both an OIF (it's strapped to one of his arms) and Restrainable (If he is grabbed he can't use the Shield effectively). Exactly. If he can't swing/shoot the weapon, it's nullified (Restrainable), and if he's not actively resisting, it can be unstrapped/unlocked and removed with a little effort (OIF). There's no rule about not combining the two. I think Restrainable is over-... uhm, can't say 'overcosted', but isn't quite worth a -1/2, since OIF + Restrainable is less of a drawback than a straight OAF for the same value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyrm Ouroboros Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? I've an archer with flatspace bracers (from Ultraviolet) out of which come his arrows, bows, etc. I put the power together as OIF on the MPow pool (bracers can't be taken away in combat), but OAF on the slots, because any particular slot can be disarmed during combat. The current combat is a good example -- he's wearing his bracers, but the combat staff just got knocked out of his hands. (Well, okay, he got knocked clear across the room and reduced to 0 STUN, hence the staff is no longer in his grip, but that's beside the point.) He can, when his turn comes around, 'call out' a new weapon, even a new staff (because he's got several stored in there), but he's going to have to get the weapon extracted first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrosshairCollie Posted January 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? I've an archer with flatspace bracers (from Ultraviolet) out of which come his arrows' date=' bows, etc. I put the power together as O[b']I[/b]F on the MPow pool (bracers can't be taken away in combat), but OAF on the slots, because any particular slot can be disarmed during combat. The current combat is a good example -- he's wearing his bracers, but the combat staff just got knocked out of his hands. (Well, okay, he got knocked clear across the room and reduced to 0 STUN, hence the staff is no longer in his grip, but that's beside the point.) He can, when his turn comes around, 'call out' a new weapon, even a new staff (because he's got several stored in there), but he's going to have to get the weapon extracted first. Kinda nifty. With the thing I was building, I was figuring that the weapons were configured to automatically return to the storage tesseract if he lost contact with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? It is a fair point, isn't it: an OAF is pretty much restrainable by definition, but restrainable+OIF is less restricted than OAF, but for the same limitation value. I like Wyrm Orobouros' solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulcan Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? Yeah, a custom disad "Restrainable OIF" at -3/4 sounds pretty reasonable to me too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kdansky Posted January 15, 2009 Report Share Posted January 15, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? But then, the difference between Restrainable + OIF to OAF is pretty slim. You can take both away. If you get grabbed or entangled, you cannot use either (although OAF makes exceptions here, see the rules). You can only disarm the OAF, but you can "weaponlock" against both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted January 15, 2009 Report Share Posted January 15, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? Personally I'd like to see a little more structure introduced. Restrainable can apply to a focus, but does not necessarily do so. I would be inclined to remove the 'restrainable' element of focuses entirely, so that you can add it in when building a power. IIF would probably be gotten rid of entirely, as would OIF: if a focus in inaccessable then it is more appropriately built with OIHID: if you have not got it then you can not access the powers, but it is difficult to prevent you using it once the powers are activated. An OAF or IAF would be worth -1/4 and -1/2 respectively, to which you could add 'restrainable' at the -1/4 or -1/2 levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrosshairCollie Posted January 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? IIF would probably be gotten rid of entirely' date=' as would OIF: if a focus in inaccessable then it is more appropriately built with OIHID: [/quote'] Would there then be a 'breakable' limitation? the other aspect of Foci besides removal (that often gets overlooked) is damage/destruction. An OIHID 'battlesuit' would be unremovable *and* unbreakable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 Re: Tesseract Storage Device: Cheesy? Would there then be a 'breakable' limitation? the other aspect of Foci besides removal (that often gets overlooked) is damage/destruction. An OIHID 'battlesuit' would be unremovable *and* unbreakable. Good point. I'd think there would: if you can turn one or more powers off by hitting them then that has to be worth something. You could have it at multiple levels even: -1/4 for breakable in combat by exceeding Points/5 or DEF, whichever is higher. -1/2 for fragile: Points/10 or DEF/2. NB something can be effectively indestructible in combat without actually being indestructible - if you are wearing Body Armour and a shot gets through it doesn;t all crumble to dust. I also think you ought to be allowed to buy Body for Focii at 1 point per point (you don't get the focus limitation on that). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.