Regeneration: What am I missing?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

...

 

You've built this with decreased re-use duration, down to 1 turn: my point was that Hero regeneration is NOT build with that advantage: it uses a limitation to give it that advantage as a special case.

 

Also 'Always on' is generally not allowed for regeneration as there is no substantial downside.

 

re: Trigger only activating one time.

 

You are ascribing a cost reduction to the Trigger Advantage that I purposely did not use:

Character does not control activation of personal Trigger (-1/4)

 

Adding the Trigger Advantage to a power does not automatically remove the effects of the Persistent Advantage. In most cases only one or the other is needed. In my example both are included to cover the very situation you describe.

 

--

 

I already showed an example of Regeneration that costs and behaves exactly the same mechanically as the book recommended method.

 

I have already made a case for Always On being a valid Limitation in appropriate circumstances as well.

[jtelson]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

The Continuous Advantage just allows a character to use an Attack Power on a continuing basis without having to make a new Attack Roll every Phase against the same target.

 

Continuous converts any Instant power into a Constant power so while it is often used as you describe above that's not just what it is used for though you are correct the Regeneration option does, for reasons beyond comprehention, not require the continuous advantage.

 

Does Damage shield still require things be constant? (Flip flip flip, yes)

[jtelson]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

Best not to get me started.

 

Yeah ok, having read through it I see why...

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

Continuous converts any Instant power into a Constant power so while it is often used as you describe above that's not just what it is used for though you are correct the Regeneration option does, for reasons beyond comprehention, not require the continuous advantage.

 

 

Besides what the book recommended regeneration option states about the requirement for Continuous there is one simple 'common sense' reason it's not necessary in this case: Persistent.

 

from 5er pg 100:

 

PERSISTENT POWERS

A Persistent Power stays activated *unless the character deliberately turns it off. Persistent Powers include Mental Defense, Armor, Enhanced Senses, and any power bought with the Persistent Advantage (page 257).

 

* This is a very good argument for allowing the Always On Limitation for building 'regeneration'. How many GM's would allow a character to turn off their 'regeneration' based solely on the lack of that Limitation being present and no other prior discussion of the nature of the ability?

 

 

from 5er pg 257:

An Instant or Constant Power with this +½ Advantage becomes a Persistent Power

 

And already being constant (by default or by way of Continuous) is NOT a prerequisite for applying Persistent to a power.

[jtelson]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

And already being constant (by default or by way of Continuous) is NOT a prerequisite for applying Persistent to a power.

 

Ahhh, and that's what I missed - I seem to remember Constant was a requirement for Persistant - Must have been 4th or earlier.

[Lucius]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

Ah, OK, then, that explains the discrepancy.

 

Sheesh, wasn't 10 per Body much simpler? (And more in line with the usefulness of the power...)

 

Why, yes, yes it was.

 

And yes, they should have kept that and ditched Healing.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

And a Regenerating Palindromedary

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

...

And a Regenerating Palindromedary

 

If your hump is cut off does more than one grow back like a Hydra?

[Lucius]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

I don't see that actually simplifying the rule set any because it probably would require just as many exceptions to be included to forbid combining '4e Regeneration' with Usable By Others (which would otherwise make Healing obsolete).

 

Um, actually, no it doesn't. In fact, as far as I know, there never has existed an exception to Regeneration saying it could not be Usable By Others.

 

There WAS a time before the Healing power had been invented to plague us - Healing came in with Champions III. Before that if you wanted a healing type power you either took Regeneration Usable On Others or RECovery Usable On Others. If you want to say that made Healing obsolete from the moment it was introduced, I'm not going to argue.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary Usable As Attack

[jtelson]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

I'm pretty sure there was a point when Aid healed if the target was below it's normal value. That worked fairly well for healing.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

I'm pretty sure there was a point when Aid healed if the target was below it's normal value. That worked fairly well for healing.

 

That was 4E. if you wanted a Healing effect, you limited Aid with "only to starting values". It was quite easy to build a character with, say, 1/2d6 Aid, 0 END, Persistent, All Characteristics, only below starting value which went off every phase and bumped up an average of 2 STUN and 4 END. A pretty cheap way for a 6 SPD character to get a better result than spending 24 points on +12 REC.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

re: Trigger only activating one time.

 

You are ascribing a cost reduction to the Trigger Advantage that I purposely did not use:

Character does not control activation of personal Trigger (-1/4)

 

Adding the Trigger Advantage to a power does not automatically remove the effects of the Persistent Advantage. In most cases only one or the other is needed. In my example both are included to cover the very situation you describe.

 

--

 

I already showed an example of Regeneration that costs and behaves exactly the same mechanically as the book recommended method.

 

I accept that, but all trigger does is bring forward the healing - you still need to wait a turn until you can get the rest of it. My point - which you said was wrong, which started this discussion - is that adding healing can not work more frequently than once per turn, and none of your builds or arguments contradict that - all the trigger does is mean that you do not have to wait for the first PS12/available phase, but you WILL have to wait a turn for the second one. Trigger doesn't change the base rule that all body is one, only a GM option can do this. Without the GM option here is what I see happening.

 

SPD 4 character, on phase 5 he takes a 6 Body wound. He instantly heals 2 Body, so he is down 4.

 

On phase 6, the power, being constant*, activates again, but can not heal any more of the injury as a turn has not passed since it was last used.

 

On phase 8 the character takes another wound, this time 2 Body. The trigger activates the power again, but it has no effect as he has already healed the maximum and a turn has not passed.

 

It is not until phase 5 of the next turn that the character can take another healing (of 2 Body), and then only if he has a held action or is wounded again - otherwise he has to wait to phase 6 for the power to automatically cut in.

 

Do you agree that is how it works?

 

 

 

 

 

*...and i also don't accept - but recognise that the argument is futile - that 'persistent' on its own makes a power constant. I know the argument, but even accepting that, Heal DOES require an attack roll. It can be waived for common sense (how did you miss yourself?) but it is still there.

 

I have already made a case for Always On being a valid Limitation in appropriate circumstances as well.

 

I missed that - is it on this thread?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

As a House Rule I allow both Absorption and Transfer to be declared as "Healing Based" as a +0 Advantage. Such an effect only restores up to starting values but does not Fade.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

re: Trigger & Healing

 

From 5er page 186:

 

Tracking Injuries...

However, at the GM’s option*, characters can keep track of each individual injury or wound they receive. Healing can then be applied to each injury separately (which makes Healing much more powerful and effective). Standard rules for the maximum effect of Healing, and for applying multiple types of Healing, apply per individual wound.

 

* This is kind of assumed when I used 'triggered per wound' in the name of the ability.

 

With that in mind, Trigger would allow my last build to kick in for multiple individual wound in a single Turn (and then continue individually per wound every Turn on the Phase they occurred).

 

Heck, with regard to 'GM permission', any form of 'regeneration' should probably also be taken into account in games using 'caps' on defenses.

 

re: Always On & 'regeneration'

 

There is no written rule forbidding the combination.

 

It is certainly a valid Limitation for character's with Secret ID's (or organizations, the existence of aliens, etc..) to protect from the public.

 

And finally, a possible 'in game' example:

There are real world diseases and toxins that actually work faster on higher metabolisms. A GM could build something like this with a Drain or Transform power in HERO that is more effective the if the target has a high REC or 'regeneration'. Now, if an otherwise average REC character with 'regeneration' is not build with the Always On Limitation, the player should reasonably be allowed to 'turn off' his 'regeneration. I doubt that many GM's would though because they 'assumed' that the power was 'always on'. Now if the same GM also disallowed the Always On Limitation for 'regeneraton' he would be enforcing a double standard.

 

...

 

Sean,

 

I find myself disagreeing with just about everything you've said in this thread. That's no mean feat. You've outdone yourself.

 

I'm not a lawyer but If I recall correctly you've stated that you are.

 

You're arguments remind me of situation common on several cop & law shows. Many times the cops have enough evidence to arrest a suspect but the DA (district attorney) tells them to let the suspect go as the evidence is not enough to convict.

 

The points you've raised are valid enough to warrant GM review (an arrest) but I doubt that most would disallow my build (a conviction). I think it's fair and legal expenditure of points IF the GM is willing to deal with the game time tracking it would require.

 

HM

[Sean Waters]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

re: Trigger & Healing

 

From 5er page 186:

 

.................

 

* This is kind of assumed when I used 'triggered per wound' in the name of the ability.

 

With that in mind, Trigger would allow my last build to kick in for multiple individual wound in a single Turn (and then continue individually per wound every Turn on the Phase they occurred).

 

Heck, with regard to 'GM permission', any form of 'regeneration' should probably also be taken into account in games using 'caps' on defenses.

 

Yes, you can track individual wounds with GM permission, potentially increasing the efficaciousness of regeneration, but that is not the standard way it is done. It gives a substantial boost to regeneration if you do as it allows simultaneous healing. Regeneration, being a way of making you better faster rather than stopping you taking damage in the first place is not a particularly efficient buy. I would generally allow individual wound tracking, but then again it is not the base way the system runs it, for reasons of 'simplicity'. Actually, saying I'd allow it, I'd probably overcomplicate: some wounds contribute to 'overall' damage, some have an effect on their own: to a large extent I do not care: regeneration rarely has a really big effect on combat - it tends to just stop you dying afterwards. the points are almost always more efficiently spent on defences.

 

However, even with individual wound tracking, you STILL can not regenerate any given wound more frequently than once per turn.

 

The only point I was making was that the maximum regeneration 'speed' is once per turn - whether a 'target' is a whole person or an individual wound - and that is absolutely and incontravertably right, as I'm sure you agree.

 

THEREFORE the extra time limitation is worth, at best, a fraction of the normal value - which was the conclusion I was drawing: this is one place where Steve was just making it up without reference to the rest of the system. In my opinion. An opinion that is supported, I'd suggest, by an enormous weight of evidence.

 

re: Always On & 'regeneration'

 

There is no written rule forbidding the combination.

 

It is certainly a valid Limitation for character's with Secret ID's (or organizations, the existence of aliens, etc..) to protect from the public.

 

And finally, a possible 'in game' example:

There are real world diseases and toxins that actually work faster on higher metabolisms. A GM could build something like this with a Drain or Transform power in HERO that is more effective the if the target has a high REC or 'regeneration'. Now, if an otherwise average REC character with 'regeneration' is not build with the Always On Limitation, the player should reasonably be allowed to 'turn off' his 'regeneration. I doubt that many GM's would though because they 'assumed' that the power was 'always on'. Now if the same GM also disallowed the Always On Limitation for 'regeneraton' he would be enforcing a double standard.

 

...

 

I'm not suggesting there is ay specific rule forbidding the combination. This has been discussed before and I've pointed out that regeneration, persistent, remains on - and therefore VISIBLE even when it is not actually haling wounds - presumably your skin crawls across itself in constant motion, or somesuch. Maybe you glow. Maybe you hum. Maybe you stink. Any way you look at it, it has to be obvious that you have a power running, at all times when it is on. I've been shouted down on that before, I have not yet gone back and checked who did the shouting.

 

However, 'always on', quite apart from the visibility problem, has to have a down side. If it does not, then you don't get a limitation better than -0. Leaving aside 'visibility' (which is NOT a problem worthy the limitaiton because:

 

a) you can spend points to make it not visible if you choose

you can take a disadvantage for that and should not be double dipping

c) the examples for 'always on' cause major problems for the character quite apart from visibility) how does 'always heals any wound REALLY quickly' cause you problems that make the power 1/3 cheaper?

 

 

 

Sean,

 

I find myself disagreeing with just about everything you've said in this thread. That's no mean feat. You've outdone yourself.

 

I'm not a lawyer but If I recall correctly you've stated that you are.

 

You're arguments remind me of situation common on several cop & law shows. Many times the cops have enough evidence to arrest a suspect but the DA (district attorney) tells them to let the suspect go as the evidence is not enough to convict.

 

The points you've raised are valid enough to warrant GM review (an arrest) but I doubt that most would disallow my build (a conviction). I think it's fair and legal expenditure of points IF the GM is willing to deal with the game time tracking it would require.

 

HM

 

My post addressed the problem that the OP posted, and answered that clearly, concisely and correctly - which no one else had done. Chosing not to acknowledge that, you start your reply with the word 'Wrong', quoting the addendum to the answer, and ignoring the answer itself. An independent observer might suggest that you were choosing to pick a fight.

 

You took a part of that addendum, blowing up the text size, and ignored the footnote that stated that even with 'decreased re-use duration' the most you could get healing re-use down to was 1/turn, you stared that healing could be used with the trigger advantage to respond to each wound seperately.

 

With respect, that build doesn't do diddly except, perhaps, bring forward the first instance of healing for a couple of segments, without GM permission. It does not, of itself, modify the base rule.

 

My reply was not wrong, even if you do change the base assumptions. Here was my assertion:

 

 

The fact that the healing power can not be used more frequently than once per turn on any given target under any circumstances*, you may wisely choose to turn a blind eye to, as that would mean that the power modifier has no actual effect, and so is worth -0, at best.

 

*Even if built with decreased re-use duration, which it is not.

 

I'd argue (but then I would, wouldn't I?) that the word 'target' can apply equally to a person (if the rule is that you can only target a whole person) or a wound (if you rule that you can target wounds individually). Either way, a 'target' can not be effectively 'treated' more than once per turn by a standard effect healing (you CAN trigger/activate healing as often as you like - it just will not have any additional effect).

 

And that is right.

[pinecone]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

Ah, OK, then, that explains the discrepancy.

 

Sheesh, wasn't 10 per Body much simpler? (And more in line with the usefulness of the power...)

 

Preachin to the choir brother...

[pinecone]

Re: Regeneration: What am I missing?

 

As a House Rule I allow both Absorption and Transfer to be declared as "Healing Based" as a +0 Advantage. Such an effect only restores up to starting values but does not Fade.

 

A very good plan...IMHO...