lim cost: semi-lockout

[secretID]

EC with six slots, only five of which can be used at a time. What do you think that lim is worth?

 

Thanks.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Somewhere between (-0) and (-1/4).

 

It sounds a lot like building a Multipower with a reserve of 100 and 6 powers built using 'Ultra' slots of 20 Active points each.

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Six abilities, pick which five are the most useful? I'd give it a -0.

[secretID]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Well, this is the stupidest thread I've ever started. I misread the power. Given that, I don't know why I had any question anyway - my brain just stopped working. Thanks for the responses, anyway.

 

The actual power is an EC with 6 slots, only 3 of which can be in use at any time. There's limited control over which three: if the powers are A through F, A can't be used with B, C not with D, and E not with F.

 

I'm thinking -3/4. You lose half the powers, but you have some control over which half.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

The actual power is an EC with 6 slots' date=' only 3 of which can be in use at any time. There's limited control over which three: if the powers are A through F, A can't be used with B, C not with D, and E not with F.[/quote']

 

This still sounds more like a Multipower than an EC, so you may want to elaborate further. Without knowing more details, I'd probably give it a -1/2 Limitation on the slot cost, but nothing on the pool cost.

[secretID]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

This still sounds more like a Multipower than an EC' date=' so you may want to elaborate further.[/quote']

I'm not sure what I could add. I can lay it out a little better (though with made up #s):

 

EC - 5

power A - 5

power B - 5

power C - 5

power D - 5

power E - 5

power F - 5

 

All powers are constants, cost END. A and B can't be activated at the same time, and the same goes for C and D, and for E and F.

 

I agree that it sounds more like a MP. I think that could be done in one of 2 ways:

1) a big MP with 8 slots, each slot a combo power (one is A+C, another B+C, another A+D, etc.);

2) 3 separate MPs, one for each of the "conflicting" pairs of powers.

 

That's not what the player wanted to do, and I'm not inclined to push it on him.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

I'm not sure what I could add. I can lay it out a little better (though with made up #s):

 

EC - 5

power A - 5

power B - 5

power C - 5

power D - 5

power E - 5

power F - 5

 

All powers are constants, cost END. A and B can't be activated at the same time, and the same goes for C and D, and for E and F.

 

I agree that it sounds more like a MP. I think that could be done in one of 2 ways:

1) a big MP with 8 slots, each slot a combo power (one is A+C, another B+C, another A+D, etc.);

2) 3 separate MPs, one for each of the "conflicting" pairs of powers.

 

That's not what the player wanted to do, and I'm not inclined to push it on him.

 

This is a situation where the types of powers involved matter. Are A and B the same type of power? Are the other 'sets' related to A or B?

 

What's the Limitation value for a MP slot with "Only works during the day" if another slot in the same MP has an 'equivalent power' with "Only works at night"? Certainly not the normal (-1) right?

[secretID]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

This is a situation where the types of powers involved matter. Are A and B the same type of power? Are the other 'sets' related to A or B?

 

What's the Limitation value for a MP slot with "Only works during the day" if another slot in the same MP has an 'equivalent power' with "Only works at night"? Certainly not the normal (-1) right?

 

Good point. I definitely don't think there's any deliberate manipulation of that kind. The special effect is basically spheres of magic: earth/air, fire/water, and light/dark.

 

I don't think it's there inadvertantly either. There's no pair that could not be used together were it not for this lim, and not even a case of powers that likely wouldn't be used together, like desol and force field.

 

I rebuilt it as three separate MPs, one for each conflicting pair, and it was a lot more expensive. That doesn't mean the EC is wrong. ECs can be pretty cheap; it's cheaper in the EC even without the lim. The EC has the drain/suppress issue, too.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

...

 

I rebuilt it as three separate MPs, one for each conflicting pair, and it was a lot more expensive. That doesn't mean the EC is wrong. ECs can be pretty cheap; it's cheaper in the EC even without the lim. The EC has the drain/suppress issue, too.

 

You should look at this FAQ entry:

 

If a character wants powers outside his EC (whether in another Power Framework or otherwise) to be affected by negative Adjustment Powers (Drains and the like) as if they were in the EC (to represent a linkage of the overall special effects of his powers), how can he buy that?

 

To simulate this sort of linkage, take this Limitation on all relevant powers outside the EC: Affected By Negative Adjustment Powers Used On [Name] EC (-1/4).

 

If a character wants his EC to suffer negative effects when any of the outside, related, powers suffer them, he should take the following Limitation on all such EC powers subject to the handicap: Affected By Negative Adjustment Powers Used On Any Outside Power Of [X] Special Effect (-1/4). (Feel free to define X more specifically if you want and the GM doesn’t object.)

 

If a character wants the slots in his Multipower to work like an EC in regard to the effects of Drain (or the like), he really should buy an EC instead of a Multipower. But if the GM doesn’t object, he could apply a variant of these -1/4 Limitations to make the Multipower work like an EC in regard to Drains and the like.

 

Of course, the value of these Limitations may change depending on the frequency with which Drains (and the like) are used in the campaign.

[tesuji]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Asume 20 pt powers

 

it is "balanced" ie book legal for me to have

 

Multipower 60 pt pool

six 2 pt slots for 12 more cp

aka 72 cp

 

for 72 cp thus i get three powers at a time out of six in any combo.

 

according to faq if i want this to "share the drain" i get a -1/4 turning that into only a net 60 cp cost.

 

that means six powers three at a time, any three, with the ec like drain is only 60 cp total.

 

So building the same thing as an ec should cost about 60 cp.

 

But wait, you want "only in certain pairs... which is small but maybe noticeable.

 

either way the total cost should be less than or equal to 60 cp.

 

well six 20 pt slots into an ec costs only 70 cp, 10 each.

 

if we give the slots a -1/4 for the semi lockout, we get 58 cp.

 

58 cp is just a smidgen below 60.

 

so i would allow what you suggest with a -1/4 on the slots, not on the pool, and call it a day.

 

agree that it sounds more like a MP. I think that could be done in one of 2 ways:

1) a big MP with 8 slots, each slot a combo power (one is A+C, another B+C, another A+D, etc.);

2) 3 separate MPs, one for each of the "conflicting" pairs of powers.

 

agreed but the point is the two should have similar cost.

 

so use the obvious legal mp build to get the heighborhood the ec construct should be then reverse engineer the appropriate value for the lim.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

What can one add but "rep for tesuji"?

[secretID]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Hmm...can't agree with you, Hugh.

 

I don't think tesuji answered the question. I agree that reverse engineering is a way to price it but while that MP build allows three at once, it does not have the lim in question of not using the pairs. That is, to make that MP match the EC in question, we would still have to do a custom lim and decide the value.

 

The MP constructs I proposed have that "lim" built in. They're so expensive that the EC is cheaper w/o giving anything for the lim.

[Ice9]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

The MP constructs I proposed have that "lim" built in. They're so expensive that the EC is cheaper w/o giving anything for the lim.

A bit confused here - are you saying that the total power would be more expensive because of the extra limitation? While it's always possible to construct a power in an extremely expensive way, I don't think that'd be the best benchmark for it.

 

Now if power frameworks could be combined, you could simply represent it as an EC of MPs, which works out to about a -1/2 limitation if you calculate it out. However, as even full lockout is -1/2, I think tesuji's -1/4 would be more accurate.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Hmm...can't agree with you, Hugh.

 

I don't think tesuji answered the question. I agree that reverse engineering is a way to price it but while that MP build allows three at once, it does not have the lim in question of not using the pairs. That is, to make that MP match the EC in question, we would still have to do a custom lim and decide the value.

 

The MP constructs I proposed have that "lim" built in. They're so expensive that the EC is cheaper w/o giving anything for the lim.

 

The following multipowers with the FAQ suggested Limitation is cheaper by 10 points (20x3=60 vs. 10x7=70). If the Limitation is dropped then the cost is 72 (24x3) vs. 70. Not "so expensive" imo.

 

10 Elemental Control, 20-point powers

10 1) A: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

10 2) B: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

10 3) C: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

10 4) D: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

10 5) E: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

10 6) F: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

 

16 A or B: Multipower, 20-point reserve, (20 Active Points); Limited Power Multipower Reserve Affected By Negative Adjustment Powers As An EC (Per FAQ: http://www.herogames.com/rulesFAQ.htm?ruleset=Hero+System+Fifth+Edition%2C+Revised&section=&keywords=Adjustment+Multipower&dateString=; -1/4)

2u 1) A: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

2u 2) B: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

 

16 C or D: Multipower, 20-point reserve, (20 Active Points); Limited Power Multipower Reserve Affected By Negative Adjustment Powers As An EC (Per FAQ: http://www.herogames.com/rulesFAQ.htm?ruleset=Hero+System+Fifth+Edition%2C+Revised&section=&keywords=Adjustment+Multipower&dateString=; -1/4)

2u 1) C: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

2u 2) D: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

 

16 E or F: Multipower, 20-point reserve, (20 Active Points); Limited Power Multipower Reserve Affected By Negative Adjustment Powers As An EC (Per FAQ: http://www.herogames.com/rulesFAQ.htm?ruleset=Hero+System+Fifth+Edition%2C+Revised&section=&keywords=Adjustment+Multipower&dateString=; -1/4)

2u 1) E: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

2u 2) F: Custom Power (20 Active Points) - END=2

[secretID]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

A bit confused here - are you saying that the total power would be more expensive because of the extra limitation?

No. B/c it seemed more like a MP to me, and b/c MP already has a "lockout" of sorts built in (i.e., you can't use all powers at once), I rebuilt it with MPs to see what the lim on the EC should be worth. I see two ways to do it with MPs:

1) three different MPs, one for each pair;

2) one big MP, with a slot for each combo of powers (an A-C-E slot, a B-C-E slot, etc., for 8 slots total).

(There may be other ways, but without added lims, tesuji's is not one, as far as I can tell.) Each of the MP builds that I did was considerably more expensive than the EC build, even before cutting the EC price for the value of the semi-lockout.

 

While it's always possible to construct a power in an extremely expensive way' date=' I don't think that'd be the best benchmark for it.[/quote']

I fully agree.

 

even full lockout is -1/2

Ha! That's a pretty easy way to look at it - thanks. I don't have a version of the rules explaining lockout (I think it's in Fantasy Hero) - would full lockout prevent the use of all the other powers in the EC, or all other powers period, or GM's option...?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Lockout - (Hero System Fifth Edition Rule Book Revised, page 301; Fantasy Hero, page 134-135)

 

This Limitation signifies that while the character casts and maintains a spell, he cannot cast any other spells.

from 5er:

 

LOCKOUT

Value: -½

A power with this Limitation prevents the character from using some or all of his other powers when it’s in use. It’s most commonly taken for a slot in a Power Framework that prevents the character from using other slots in the Framework (in situations where that normally wouldn’t be the case).

 

Typically Lockout is worth -½. However, the GM may adjust this value depending on how many powers the Lockout prevents the character from using, how important those powers are, and so forth.

From FH:

 

LIMITED POWER

As the catch-all Limitation, Limited Power works with Fantasy spells and abilities in an almost infinite number of ways. Here are examples of a few common or interesting uses of Limited Power for Fantasy Hero games:

Lockout (-½)

This Limitation signifies that while the character casts and maintains a spell, he cannot cast any other spells. Typically he also cannot maintain spells cast before casting the spell, but the GM may grant some exceptions.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Asume 20 pt powers

 

it is "balanced" ie book legal for me to have

 

Multipower 60 pt pool

six 2 pt slots for 12 more cp

aka 72 cp

 

for 72 cp thus i get three powers at a time out of six in any combo.

 

according to faq if i want this to "share the drain" i get a -1/4 turning that into only a net 60 cp cost.

 

that means six powers three at a time, any three, with the ec like drain is only 60 cp total.

 

To this point, we have established that the EC as described should cost no more than 60 points. The MP as described, fully book-legal, would cost 60 and allow selection of any 3 of the six powers. The EC allows less choice, and should therefore cost less.

 

well six 20 pt slots into an ec costs only 70 cp, 10 each.

 

if we give the slots a -1/4 for the semi lockout, we get 58 cp.

 

58 cp is just a smidgen below 60.

 

so i would allow what you suggest with a -1/4 on the slots, not on the pool, and call it a day.

 

Or allow it on the pool as well and we get 56. Still within the bounds of reasonable, IMO.

 

Hmm...can't agree with you, Hugh.

 

I don't think tesuji answered the question. I agree that reverse engineering is a way to price it but while that MP build allows three at once, it does not have the lim in question of not using the pairs. That is, to make that MP match the EC in question, we would still have to do a custom lim and decide the value.

 

The MP constructs I proposed have that "lim" built in. They're so expensive that the EC is cheaper w/o giving anything for the lim.

 

MP is simply the wrong construct for this combination. If it would be cheaper to buy the same abilities with less restrictions, something is inherently wrong.

 

To build this as a Multipower, one could take a 60 point pool and 8 60 point slots (one for each combination of the choices available). All would have the -1/4 "drain one, drain all" limitation, so that's 48 for the MP and 5 for each slot, which would cost 68 points.

 

However, this would be more restrictive and more expensive than a 60 point pool with 6 20 point slots, again limited with "drain one/drain all". "More restricted" should not be "more expensive".

 

I'd say Lockout at -1/2 for the EC is excessive, given only one other ability of at least 5 (more assuming the character has other powers) is inaccessible. However, given the definition, maybe it's reasonable. That would lower the cost to 49 (or 52 if we don't apply Lockout to the pool).

 

I suppose another approach would be to buy each power individually (20 points) and apply Lockout (-1/2) and Drain one Drain all (-1/4), reducing each power's cost to 11 for a total of 66. This is two points less than the "Combo Multipower".

 

The Combo Multipower (or buying all 6 powers separately) does not require all the powers be of a single SFX, or that they all have the exact same AP cost to achieve maximum point effectiveness. A discount for the EC structure seems reasonable.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

To this point' date=' we have established that the EC as described should cost no more than 60 points. ...[/quote']

 

Don't you mean 70 points? (for 6 different 20 point powers)

Or do you mean 72 points? (using the 3 20 point reserve/ 2 slot multipowers method)

[secretID]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

The following multipowers with the FAQ suggested Limitation is cheaper by 10 points (20x3=60 vs. 10x7=70). If the Limitation is dropped then the cost is 72 (24x3) vs. 70. Not "so expensive" imo.

Huh. Running more examples, I found that, depending on the points of the powers and lims, the MP build can be cheaper. When I run it with the actual power (which is considerably more complicated then the simplified version I gave for discussion), the MP build is still a good deal more expensive (I didn't bother to fully examine why), but regardless, it does seem that -1/4 makes it balance out pretty well with the average set of powers.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

Don't you mean 70 points? (for 6 different 20 point powers)

Or do you mean 72 points? (using the 3 20 point reserve/ 2 slot multipowers method)

 

I mean that I can buy a Multipower with a 60 point base, and 6 20 point Ultra slots, with the Drain One Drain All limitation on everything for 60 points (48 for the base and 2 for each slot), exactly as tesuji has set out above my comment.

 

As this would allow everything the proposed EC is capable of, plus allowing a choice of any three powers without restriction, and not require a common special effect, the EC should clearly cost no more, than this construct.

 

The actual construct would presumably make a difference, but we haven't seen the exact construct. It's certainly possible to generate inappropriate results swapping between frameworks. For example:

 

60 MP - Fire Powers 60 point pool

6 4d6 RKA Flame Strike

6 12d6 EB Flame Bolt

6 6d6 NND Heatstroke

 

78

 

As an EC, these cost 120 points, but I get no added functionality.

 

60 MP 60 point base

2 30" Flight, Restrainable wings (-1/2), 3x END (-1), Drain one Drain all (-1/4)

2 12d6 EB, Act 14- (-1/2), 2 handed Gestures (-1/2), Full Phase (-1/2), Drain one Drain all (-1/4)

2 +30/+30 Force Field, Concentrate (0 DCV throughout; -1), OIF focusing Headband (-1/2), Drain one Drain all (-1/4)

 

66 points

 

30 EC 30 point base

10 2 30" Flight, Restrainable wings (-1/2), 3x END (-1), Lockout other EC powers (-1/2)

10 12d6 EB, Act 14- (-1/2), 2 handed Gestures (-1/2), Full Phase (-1/2), Lockout other EC powers (-1/2)

10 +30/+30 Force Field, Concentrate (0 DCV throughout; -1), OIF focusing Headband (-1/2), Lockout other EC powers (-1/2)

 

60 points for the exact same result

 

Sometimes, we need to use some judgement to assess if the application of the math carries an equitable result.

[tesuji]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

 

Or allow it on the pool as well and we get 56. Still within the bounds of reasonable, IMO.

 

 

agreed. the reason i went with only on the slots was because i was on the fence between -1/4 and -0 sfx for this weak a lim (assuming three useful together pairs) so i went with the slightest option, a whimpy compromise kind of thing, especially since its such a slight difference 56 vs 58.

 

either would be playable. either way we are in the neighborhood, close enough for gummint work.

 

imo.

[braincraft]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

This kind of tomfoolery is why I hate ECs and always disallow them. I can't think of any mechanical benefit to the things, other than rewarding players who are good at maths.

[Greywind]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

They are supposed to help with concepts.

 

Unfortunately, if they aren't carefully monitored they lead directly to munchkinism.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

This kind of tomfoolery is why I hate ECs and always disallow them. I can't think of any mechanical benefit to the things' date=' other than rewarding players who are good at maths.[/quote']

 

They are supposed to help with concepts.

 

Unfortunately, if they aren't carefully monitored they lead directly to munchkinism.

 

Really? I always thought VPPs lead to munchkinism...

[Greywind]

Re: lim cost: semi-lockout

 

VPPs just tend to be a lot more "open" in interpretation.