Extra time, only to change multipower slots?

[tesuji]

Comments are simple, apply a typical limitation to the slots... for example, full phase to change would be a -1/4 (half the value for constant only to start )

 

do not apply the lim to the pool.

 

Originally posted by Narthon

If it helps at all, here is the writeup of the full multipower I'm trying to create:

 

Flashlight Laser multipower 75 active, oaf (-1) 37

u Heat/Light Energy Blast 0end (+1/2) oaf (-1) 10d6 4

u Flash vs Sight AE cone (+1) 0 end (+1/2) no range (-1/2) 6d6 3

u Images vs sight 0 end AE cone (+1) x4 side length (+1) (48â€) to create light only (-1) oaf (-1) no range (-1/2) 1

u Variable Sword: 2d6 HKA 2x Armor piercing (+1) 0end (+1/2) 4d6 HKA with str 4

u Laser 3d6+1 pip RKA 0end (+1/2) 4

 

I'm thinking about making it run off of an end reserve instead of being 0 end.

I also want it to take time to switch settings.

 

Please post comments.

[tesuji]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

To me, the bottom line here is that a TRUE...

 

So, hugh, if i get this right, if a character did INTEND to use the flash, but never really got into a case where he thought it was a good idea, then because he did not intend to abuse the rules (and thats probably smart too because you can tell) he would not be booted out and would be allowed to buy his flash and eb attacks for possible even less than just the eb attack?

 

is that right?

 

cuz thats what allowing the lim to apply to the pool cost for those players who have enough bluff skill to get past your detect intent 13- does...

 

me, i find explaining cost ~ effect to be so much easier t explain to my players than cost ~ intent, but sometimes my thinking is limited.

 

 

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by tesuji

OK, imagine the power in comparison with the same thing but with only ONE SLOT. Adding the second slot and the phase to change limitation in now way limits the first power, the character can still ALWAYS have a 60 ap power. What is limited, the only thing limited is how he chooses which slot is working. That appears to me to be a limitation affecting how easily he can dial a specific slot, not a limit on how often he can have the RESERVE in a power.

 

You can't just compare "one power/two powers in a multipower" to get the full picture. You also have to compare a character with no limitations to one who takes the limitation.

 

The advantage of a multipower is the ability to apply those active points to any opf the powers included therein. If the character took "takes a full phase to prepare" on his one EB, he would get a -1/4 limitation on the EB, reducing the cost from 30 points to 27 (assuming 12d6 OAF Gun). If it's a natural power, he would pay 48 points.

 

But if he now has 2 powers in a Multipower, each of which effectively requires a full phase to activate (ie it takes a full phase to allocate or reallocate the MP points), you want him to pay 36 for the gun (not even 1 point off - each slot costs 2.7 which rounds to 3), or 68 for the natural power (20 points more). Why take the limit? He gives up a lot of versatility for that minimal savings.

 

Sure, he's getting the second attack power for 20 points, but with no limitation at all, he would have paid 12 to add a 60 point Flash to his EB. Under your mechanic, adding the limited Flash to a limited EB costs more than adding an unlimited Flash to an unlimited EB!

 

Originally posted by tesuji

I do not think it is worth more than the SLOT costs GIVEN the comparison to a MONO-version. The onyl difference in price between a gun with one feature and a gun with multiple is the SLOTS.

 

Based on the above, the player should say "fine - it switches instantly". You have given him no point break whatsoever for a pretty significant limitation on his Multipower.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

I think it shoud vary with the real impact. I consider change at base only to be at least -1/2 while full phase to change at best -1/4.

 

The items you compare are again not comparable. "Change only at base" is a VPP limit at -1/2. The VPP already requires a full phase (-1/2) and a skill roll (-1/2) to change without the limitation.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by tesuji

So, hugh, if i get this right, if a character did INTEND to use the flash, but never really got into a case where he thought it was a good idea, then because he did not intend to abuse the rules (and thats probably smart too because you can tell) he would not be booted out and would be allowed to buy his flash and eb attacks for possible even less than just the eb attack?

 

He has effectively purchased an EB which requires 1 phase to activate. Multipower pools do not sit in a power - they must be allocated. The character in question requires 1 phase to allocate his multipower pool. Based on SFX, I may allow a character who is not abusing the ability to have a "base" slot. That means the first time he uses it, he gets away without the extra phase. Just like the guy with a single energy blast power that takes 1 phase to "warm up" can warm it up before walking into the abandoned warehouse to look for the alien. He doesn't have to wait until he enters combat.

EB: 12d6, 1 phase to prepare (-1/4) 48 points

 

Multi: EB and Flash, both with 1 phase to prepare, 58 points.

 

The two cost MORE than the one.

 

I guess what I should do in your campaign is put 1 phase to prepare on the MP base (48 points), but NOT the slots (add 12) so, for the 60 points (2 points more than the 58 woul wouldn't apply anyway), I get to spend a phase activating my multipower as a whole, and can switch it freely thereafter. That, however, is clearly abusive and I would not allow it. YMMV.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

cuz thats what allowing the lim to apply to the pool cost for those players who have enough bluff skill to get past your detect intent 13- does...

 

That comes down to trust for your players. I trust mine not to rape the rules. Apparently, you don't. Not to be derogatory, but my experience is that people project themselves on others, so if you don't trust the player, that doesn't speak well of you.

 

And "extra time" several campaigns" does wonders for your "sense intent" roll.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

me, i find explaining cost ~ effect to be so much easier t explain to my players than cost ~ intent, but sometimes my thinking is limited.

 

Obviously!

 

[i'm feling pretty sarcastic tonight, and I think I'm pretty blunt above. No offense is intended.]

[tesuji]

all attempts (obviously serious intents) at not being derogatory aside, i prefer for the math of the system i put forth to not be based in divinging the intent of the players and simply to be based on cost ~ effect.

 

I do not believe in playing favorites and allow A for the guy i like while disallowing it for the guy i dont when they are both supposed to be playing by the same rules.

 

So, clearly, our mileage does vary quite a bit.

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

You can't just compare "one power/two powers in a multipower" to get the full picture. You also have to compare a character with no limitations to one who takes the limitation.

Actually you can and it works quite nicely.

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

The advantage of a multipower is the ability to apply those active points to any opf the powers included therein. If the character took "takes a full phase to prepare" on his one EB, he would get a -1/4 limitation on the EB, reducing the cost from 30 points to 27 (assuming 12d6 OAF Gun). If it's a natural power, he would pay 48 points.

right so far.

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

But if he now has 2 powers in a Multipower, each of which effectively requires a full phase to activate (ie it takes a full phase to allocate or reallocate the MP points), you want him to pay 36 for the gun (not even 1 point off - each slot costs 2.7 which rounds to 3), or 68 for the natural power (20 points more). Why take the limit? He gives up a lot of versatility for that minimal savings.

Ok as for the no savings point, as i indicated earlier, in HERO by dint of the rounding rules sometimes a small lim added to an already existing limited power will NOT PRODUCE ANY SAVINGS. I can produce easily a dozen cases of this using standard lims and standard powers at cherry picked points.

 

Does this mean we should change the values of every lim i can cite a case for this? No. All it means is under standard HERo it is accepted that at some times a lim may not produce a small difference in cost.

 

So the fact that this is true of HTC lims in some combo lim cases is not really worth going into much. if you wish to belabor that point, feel free, but there are dozens of cases in hero so you might want to move that to another thread... it wont do anything for the discussion here. it is just a smoke screen.

 

Whether you or i or anyone else likes it or not, the system makes multipower slots CHEAP. That means the cost difference between MONOPOWER and INSTANT CHANGE MULTIPOWER is small. It should be obvious that there is a fairly BIG difference between monopower and instantchangemultipower.... but the system points them as small differences because of the "not at the same time" thingy.

 

You can argue until you are blue in the face that "the difference between free change between two powers and full phase change between two powers is BIG" and thats well and good.

 

But, stop for just a second and see if you can wrap your cranium around this... the difference between a DIFFICULT change between two powers and a free change between two powers is BY DEFINITION less than the difference between free change between two powers and never ever at all being able to change the powers.

 

Now, you, like many others seem to be obsessed with, in order to make the system seem plausible, ADDING TO THE DEFINITION "and using the power at all is a problem" and thus you can rationalize the difference.

 

I am not talking about a power which takes a full phase to start up for each fight. i am simply talking about a power set that takes a full phase to switch. if you have to add , in order to maintain you arhument, that the power MUST ALSO HAVE a startup flaw even when not changing, then you are describing something else. if your system cannot account for something as simple as a gun with differing clips which can be left loaded (or a no focus equivalent) then your system seems very very limited in what it can handle.

 

If you can wrap your system around a multipower which is set on whatever you want when in "default mode" and which can be changed but not instantly, with some time or circumstance required, then you have to be able to see that...

 

Applying the limit to the pool results in inconsistent results when comparing the three levels of limitation... sometimes putting the difficult to change cheaper than the no change ever and sometimes mor than it.

 

Applying the limit to the slots keeps it consistent (barring round offs.)

 

Sure, i can buy you saying that the difference of, for instance, 60 ap power at 60, 2 slot slow change at 70 and 2 slot instant change at 72... that the 2 point difference between slow change and fast change is not enough... but hey, thats 2 pts out of the 12 points. HERo only charges 12 points for having 2 powers instead of 1 at 60 points...

 

The answer to this is not to allow the overly cheap second power thing to let you make this thing even cheaper, so that the slow change two power thing becomes cheaper than the ONE POWER CAN NEVER EVER CHANGE IT.

 

for some, the answer might well be to say "the system wont handle it" and disallow the slow to change power unless you also take the slow to startup part... maki9ng suddenly the notion of "I have different clips of different ammo types" impossible unless they agree to never leave the gun loaded.

 

thats just too limiting to me.

 

 

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Sure, he's getting the second attack power for 20 points, but with no limitation at all, he would have paid 12 to add a 60 point Flash to his EB. Under your mechanic, adding the limited Flash to a limited EB costs more than adding an unlimited Flash to an unlimited EB!

 

 

 

Based on the above, the player should say "fine - it switches instantly". You have given him no point break whatsoever for a pretty significant limitation on his Multipower.

 

 

 

The items you compare are again not comparable. "Change only at base" is a VPP limit at -1/2. The VPP already requires a full phase (-1/2) and a skill roll (-1/2) to change without the limitation.

[Farkling]

**pours kerosene into the fiery discussion**

 

Do I have the only game in the world with multipowers that are NOT power-type oriented?

 

During this whole thread, nobody has considered the effects when defenses or movement are in the multipower...am I a dinosaur who has not converted to the point mongereing ways of new Champions? Is the GM that annoyed me so much one of the new crowd? Where is the comic book Iron Man multipower?

 

Are the flexible power characters constructed like this now?

. Attack Multipower

. Defense Multipower or Defense Elemental Control

. Movement Multipower

 

I don't get it. Judging from the thread, the only use for multipowers is to get multiple attack powers. Did I miss something somehwere?

 

Why is it that the reserve shouldn't get points for the Extra Time limitation for allocation/re-allocation??...it puts a damper on any dive for cover or force field aborts..or any defensive abort for that matter...if a power in the framework is needed.

 

The character with OAF and OIF gets to apply the limitation to HIS reserve...

concentrate or gestures/incantations would apply to the reserve if on every slot...with no increase in concentration requirements...the only thing I think Steve said NO at was the Increased END on every slot...and applied to the reserve.

 

Why is it that Extra Time to shift the reserve is such a weak limitation in your books? Mathematics aside...what's the hangup? If I simply took "delayed segment" on every slot in the power...then I could apply it to the reserve, by the book, and I get no additional time requirement, by the book.

 

This argument appears to be

"extra time only to switch the reserve is NOT limiting"

"extra time to switch the reserve is munchkining"

And the grudge over TWO POINTS for point crunching is a little excessive...I'd let him have it and make sure he experienced difficulties if necessary. But Hugh is already aware of how soft he is compared to a real evil.

 

Consider this construct::

15 (+5/+5) Armor, polymer fabric costume

30 15" Flight, OIF-Fusion Jetpack, 0 END, Personal focus (SFX, runs off of Beamer's internal energy)

 

SFX - Phased Energy Projection

72 Multipower (90) (delayed phase to shift reserve, -1/4)

18 m 90 12d6 EB, Physical, 0 END

18 m 90 12d6 Flash, Sight, 0 END

18 u 30 (+10/+10 PD/ED) Force Field, 0 END

 

I certainly don't think the extra time limitation belongs on every slot...once the powers are allocated they work as bought, it's just seting them up that takes the time...Beamer here has, oh, 20 DEX and 4 SPD

 

On Phase 12, Combat starts, he is attacked by agents...at DEX 20. Beamer, wanting to test their powers sets his fields like this::

(+10/+10 PD/ED) Force Field, 8d6 Energy BLast

At DEX 10 his Force Field is active...a quick agent could have tagged him prior to this...technically he could take a shot, but he actually took a long look around and dodged...

 

Phase 3, He fires the 8d6 EB at an agent...agent goes down. The rifle fire spangs off his force field

Phase 6, He moves for position and fires again. He spreads for two targets, and grins as more attacks spang off the force field and armor. Two agents in assault armor appear.

Phase 9, he remebers these guys, and knows his 8d6 EB won't do much more than knock them over. He ducks behind a car, and switches his powers, 9d6 EB and 3d6 Flash. At DEX 10, Beamer pops up and fires a multiple power attack. One assault agent is knocked down and blinded for 4 segments.

Phase 12, He fires at 20 DEX, hits the agent...agent takes some STUN and is not knocked down...the rat braced last phase. The agent fires back with an Area Effect attack that demoslishes the car. Lucky it didn't explode.

PF12....Everybody gets a recovery.......

Phase 3, Beamer wants his force field, NOW. He activates the Jetpack (0 Phase) to gain some altitude, and retunes his energy fields...AS Beamer rises into the air, the agent takes a shot at him.. The force field won't be active until DEX 10...the agent hits poor Beamer for 50 STUN and 12 BODY. Beamer goes through a window and some interior drywall...and lands dazed (STUNned) and lightly injured somewhere on the 5th floor. When he gets his next phase, the multipower points need to be reallocated...and the GM has him on the run if there are any agents nearby in the building...

 

So why shouldn't Beamer get points for the delayed allocation of the Multipower Reserve? Also note, on the Phase he reallocated the reserve, he COULD have aborted to raise the force field, if he did NOT have the delay to allocate, his multipower does not shift as a 0 Phase action, it is a delayed phase action. Thus he cannot abort to that defense unles he already had it allocated. He CAN dive for cover, as his jetpack will allow for that...

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Farkling

**pours kerosene into the fiery discussion**

 

One of life's little joys!

 

Originally posted by Farkling

Do I have the only game in the world with multipowers that are NOT power-type oriented?

 

I see these, but not as commonly as attack-only MP's. No question there is a points efficiency issue here. You don't use a lot of published characters and I haven't read much 5e; maybe someone can tell us how the published characters typically look. I suspect the "multiple attacks MP" is the most common by far.

 

Originally posted by Farkling

The other strcture I see on occasion is throw a force field, and maybe some bonus flight, it so I can use it if I'm not attacking, but even there the intent is principal use for attacks and huge defensesif I really need them.

 

Why is it that the reserve shouldn't get points for the Extra Time limitation for allocation/re-allocation??...it puts a damper on any dive for cover or force field aborts..or any defensive abort for that matter...if a power in the framework is needed.

 

EVEN FARKLING sees that extra time to switch MP points is a limitation. Now I'm sure my belief a limitation applies is well in the bounds of reasonable [Aside: Actually, overall, you're really not THAT unreasonable...although I hate to say it]

 

Originally posted by Farkling

The character with OAF and OIF gets to apply the limitation to HIS reserve...

concentrate or gestures/incantations would apply to the reserve if on every slot...with no increase in concentration requirements...the only thing I think Steve said NO at was the Increased END on every slot...and applied to the reserve.

 

Why is it that Extra Time to shift the reserve is such a weak limitation in your books? Mathematics aside...what's the hangup? If I simply took "delayed segment" on every slot in the power...then I could apply it to the reserve, by the book, and I get no additional time requirement, by the book.

 

I suspect the same argument would apply from Tesuji's perspective. I think he's suffering from one of two hangups on this. First, he doesn't see the limit of extra time on the basis an underhanded player could use it to buy a power using a multipower, get it cheaper than just buying the one power, and always keep the points in that power, so he never suffers a limitation. If you assume he can simply buy a two slop MP (say a 12d6 EB and a 2d6 flash; 67 points), apply the "1/2 ph to change slots" limit (down to 54 points) and have the reserve always default to EB, the player gets 6 points back for nothing. However, if you deny "default allocation of points", the limitation comes back, at least IMO. It's actually even worse (in a real MP) since the character will not be able to turn on his EB, fire it, then use another attack and come back to EB later - he shifts the points, so he has to spend extra time to shift them back. That's fine - he got a point break for the limit and the MP.

 

The other is that Temujin doesn't like the "+1 advantage" to add four more powes from the same pool (ie 1 60 point power costs 60 points; 5 in a multipower costs 120 points; all in an EC costs 180; all bought individually costs 300). This implies he doesn't see the multipower structure as overly limiting. I do, however - "300 point man" has one impressive multipower attack if those were all attack powers. If they were a mix, he can't have them all at the same time. He has been limited.

 

Originally posted by Farkling

This argument appears to be

"extra time only to switch the reserve is NOT limiting"

"extra time to switch the reserve is munchkining"

And the grudge over TWO POINTS for point crunching is a little excessive...I'd let him have it and make sure he experienced difficulties if necessary. But Hugh is already aware of how soft he is compared to a real evil.

 

You and I are on the same page here - you've already said your players still think you're a bastard. Maybe I need to check with mine (although I haven't GM'd in a while)

 

Originally posted by Farkling

I certainly don't think the extra time limitation belongs on every slot...once the powers are allocated they work as bought, it's just seting them up that takes the time...Beamer here has, oh, 20 DEX and 4 SPD

 

That's a tough one. Normally, just setting the power up halves the limitation, but since delayed phase is -1/4 to begin with, that's as low as it goes. If it took a fullphase and then stays available, that would normally be -1/2, down to -1/4 because it stays available.

 

I like your example, but clipped it for length. Let's add a wrinkle. Take the force field out entirely - we now have the maligned power. Beamer knows his 12d6 EB, which he's been spreading to take down normal agents, likely will stun them, but it will take 2 or 3 hits to down them. While he fights them, the norms will finish their task and escape - that's what armored agents are used for by this agency. If he goes after the norm's, the armored agents will clean his clock. Oh, and he knows the armored agents move on the same phases he does, and have an 18 DEX. And their attacks HURT, so if both attack and hit, he's in trouble.

 

Does he focus in on the armored agents with his EB, and take a turn or two to take them down? The normal agents will win then - they accomplish their mission. But he'll likely stun one and take less damage since only one can return fire.

 

Does he focus on the normal agents? If he does, the armored guys will take him down, or threaten civilians. He knows that from experience.

 

Or does he switch to Flash, knowing he can disable the two agents fairly quickly with his flash long enough to foil the normal agents - but risk two hits first, which may take him down?

 

Boy , that point savings sure hurts now!

 

Originally posted by Farkling

So why shouldn't Beamer get points for the delayed allocation of the Multipower Reserve?

 

I'll leave that question for temujin! I'm on this one!

 

Thanks for a good illuminating discussion, Farkling.

[Talon]

Originally posted by tesuji

i prefer for the math of the system i put forth to not be based in divinging the intent of the players and simply to be based on cost ~ effect.

 

I do not believe in playing favorites and allow A for the guy i like while disallowing it for the guy i dont when they are both supposed to be playing by the same rules.

 

I think this is what it boils down to. I'd love to GM this way, but my personal experience shows that it's more of a pain in the long run (YMMV, and apparently it does). I definitely give more rules leeway to someone who I know is doing it for roleplay reasons and is not going to abuse it. I guess that counts as "playing favorites", but I have more success with that than with trying to lay down a set of absolute rules that can be twisted just like the game rules.

[Farkling]

*with a shrug*

 

On the subject of Player A versus Player B...

 

Half my players are not so knowledgable of the rules and power constructs...they bring ideas and collect build advice.

 

The other half are good players, and know some limitations are more limiting to one person than the other.

 

Take a simple (-1/4, cannot block magnetic attacks), a subtle difference from (-1/4, does not work in magnetic fields)...if the character himself generates a magnetic field, option B is a larger limitation for him...approaching a lockout level...

 

*shrugs* it's a game...I prefer not to overcomplicate it. I'd rather let them have the limit and adjust the environment to make it a limitation.

[Gary]

Basically, it boils down to this:

 

A single 12d6 EB costs 60 pts.

 

A 60 pt multipower with EB and flash costs 72 pts.

 

"Extra time to change slots" should never bring the cost structure of the multipower below "Can never change slots" which costs 60 pts.

 

Would you agree that "Can never change slots" is more limiting than "Extra time to change slots"?

[prestidigitator]

Originally posted by tesuji

Whether he needs to change in combat or not is as much a matter of the GM and his choices as it is the players.

...

But, if i get this right, if you never provide me with these impetus and after a while you realize you have never seen me change to the Db drum IN COMBAT, you would charge me a point and make me buy off that lim?

 

So, then since i never did have to change to that one drum in combat, now my character can do so instantly, quicker than i can the others?

 

is that right?

 

LOL. Well, I certainly didn't mean to sound quite so harsh. If I saw a player do something like this and suspected it was just to save points without truely limiting the power, I would make him/her pay for it. No question. I would personally allow the Limitation on the reserve, and thus the player would be limited by it if (s)he had to switch between any of the powers.

 

If you bought a power which never wound up needing to be used in my game, because of choices I made (or maybe even otherwise), then I would probably find a way to give you an opportunity to use the cool power you built, or apologize to you and let you sell back the power again.

 

And then again, I might find that sonic attacks are more common then I thought they would be, so I might increase the cost of that Only Works Against Sonics power you have, though I might decide to grandfather you in, or give you a few extra Experience only for upgrading your power. They can be tough calls to make, but if you spare a thought for all of your players, and consider each of their situations and intentions as closely as you have time for, it sure does contribute to forming a great gaming group!

 

Originally posted by Farkling

I don't get it. Judging from the thread, the only use for multipowers is to get multiple attack powers. Did I miss something somehwere?

 

Why is it that the reserve shouldn't get points for the Extra Time limitation for allocation/re-allocation??...it puts a damper on any dive for cover or force field aborts..or any defensive abort for that matter...if a power in the framework is needed.

 

Right on, dude!

[PhilFleischmann]

tesuji is quite right. He has explained his point over and over again quite clearly. I don't understand why it's so difficult to understand for some. Try not to get distracted by unrelated subjects such as whether it's an OAF, or has other limitations, or what types of powers are in the slots.

 

Let me take another crack at it, because I'm sure Tesuji is tired of repeating himself. Here's an example which doesn't include any other limitations, no guns, safety locks, or specific power types:

 

Magic

 

Wizard A has one 50 pt spell that costs 50 points. He can use it all day long whenever he wants with no delay, as long as he has the END, and tomorrow when he wakes up in the morning, he can use it some more, and then next week and next year. He doesn't have to wait for it to "warm up."

 

Wizard B has one 50 pt spell with a -1/2 worth of Extra Time limitation. This costs 33 points. Every time he uses the power it takes the extra time (I don't remember how much extra time, but it really isn't important. I think it was an Extra Phase.)

 

Wizard C has two 50 point spells in a MP as ultra slots that each use up the whole pool. This costs 50+5+5=60 points. He can use either power, one at a time, whenever he wants, just like Wizard A can, but he has two choices which he can make freely whenever he wants as a zero-phase action.

 

Wizard D has the same MP as Wizard C, but the powers both have the Extra Time (Extra Phase) limitation on them. This costs 60/(1+1/2)=40 points. Every time he uses one of his powers in the MP, it takes an extra phase for the power to function.

 

All of the above are regular contructs in FREd.

 

Wizard E wants the same pool as Wizard C but with a Extra Time to switch slots - not extra time to use the slots - just to change from one to the other. If he's currently using slot 1, he can use it all day long with no delay, just like Wizard A uses his spell, or just like Wizard C uses any one of his slots. However, if Wizard E decides he wants to use slot 2, he must first "waist" a full phase changing the slot. After which, he can use slot two all day long and into next month with no restriction or delay, just like Wizard C could, or just like Wizard A could use his one spell.

 

The question is:

How much should Wizard E pay for his MP?

 

Some might say, "You simply can't do that!"

If that's you're answer, then I'd say you don't understand the HERO system. The main idea is that you can do what you want, how you want, as long as you pay the appropriate price for it. That's why I for one don't play d20.

 

Some might say, "That's abusive!"

To which I would respond, "How can you tell, if the price hasn't been set yet?" Clearly, if the player wanted to only pay 10 points, that's not enough, and he's trying to get more that what he's willing to pay for. But just as clearly 500 point is far more than it's worth. Somewhere between those two extremes is an appropriate (i.e., non-abusive) price for the effect the player wants.

 

So how much should it cost? Clearly, Wizard E's MP is:

slightly less useful than Wizard C's,

more useful than Wizard A's one spell,

more useful than Wizard D's MP,

much more useful than Wizard B's one spell.

 

Therefore Wizard E's MP should cost:

slightly less than 60 pts,

more than 50 pts,

more than 40 pts,

more than 33 pts.

 

If we decide that the "only to switch" should be half of the "every time you use it" limitation, then the basic limitation is -1/4. What should we apply it to?

 

If we apply it to the pool cost as well as the slot cost the price is 60/1.25=48 points.

If we apply it to the slots only, the cost is 50+10/1.25=58.

 

Which one of these is slightly less than 60 and more than 50?

 

Remember: we're not talking about rules-abusing players, we're talking about figuring out the appropriate price for something a player wants. If he's not willing to pay it, that's his problem, but if you're charging him too little, that's yours.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

tesuji is quite right. He has explained his point over and over again quite clearly. I don't understand why it's so difficult to understand for some. Try not to get distracted by unrelated subjects such as whether it's an OAF, or has other limitations, or what types of powers are in the slots.

 

Or, apparantly, being troubled to read the rules or some similar foolishness.

 

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

Let me take another crack at it, because I'm sure Tesuji is tired of repeating himself.

 

So am I...

 

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

So how much should it cost? Clearly, Wizard E's MP is:

slightly less useful than Wizard C's,

more useful than Wizard A's one spell,

more useful than Wizard D's MP,

much more useful than Wizard B's one spell.

 

Therefore Wizard E's MP should cost:

slightly less than 60 pts,

more than 50 pts,

more than 40 pts,

more than 33 pts.

 

If we decide that the "only to switch" should be half of the "every time you use it" limitation, then the basic limitation is -1/4.

 

This is in the book if you take a moment to wrap your mind around the concept. Pull out the book. Look at "Extra Time". Page 187, second paragraph. If the character spends the extra time once and can then activate the power whenever he wants, halve the limitation value.

 

So it requires 1 phase to activate the EB, after which he may use it as long as he wants. Switching to Flash shuts it off, and Flash takes a phase to "warm up". Switching back to EB means he has to take a phase again.

 

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

What should we apply it to?

 

Now go to page 207, the Power Modifers...header. If a limitation applies to the whole multipower, it applies to slots and the reserve. Technically, he could take extra time JUST TO START THE MULTIPOWER AS A WHOLE. But he has applied it to each slot, which means it ALSO applies to the reserve. He is taking a GREATER limitation than he is, in fact, required to.

 

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

If we apply it to the pool cost as well as the slot cost the price is 60/1.25=48 points. If we apply it to the slots only, the cost is 50+10/1.25=58.

 

No, if we apply it to the pool and slot costs it costs [60 + 6 + 6]/1.25 = 58 points. If we only apply it to the slots, it costs 60 + [6 + 6]/1.25 = 70 points.

 

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

Which one of these is slightly less than 60 and more than 50?

 

Yeah, which one?

 

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

Remember: we're not talking about rules-abusing players, we're talking about figuring out the appropriate price for something a player wants. If he's not willing to pay it, that's his problem, but if you're charging him too little, that's yours.

 

Actually, we're also talking about basic math skills

 

But thanks for the extensive analysis. It proves my point admirably. The power is worth LESS THAN 60 POINTS, which is what I've been saying all along.

[PhilFleischmann]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

No, if we apply it to the pool and slot costs it costs [60 + 6 + 6]/1.25 = 58 points. If we only apply it to the slots, it costs 60 + [6 + 6]/1.25 = 70 points.

Where are you getting these numbers? Certainly not from my example.

(50+5+5)/1.25=60/1.25=48

50+(5+5)/1.25=50+10/1.25=50+8=58

 

Actually, we're also talking about basic math skills

Apparently so.

 

( Sheesh! Is this brain surgery?)

[prestidigitator]

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

If we apply it to the pool cost as well as the slot cost the price is 60/1.25=48 points.

If we apply it to the slots only, the cost is 50+10/1.25=58.

 

Which one of these is slightly less than 60 and more than 50?

In truth, I would probably have allowed him to take it for the reserve, but not for the individual powers (since it doesn't limit how they are used once the MP is switched). This comes to 50/1.25+5+5=50, which is, truthfully, no more expensive than A's spell which is equivalent once the pool has been assigned.

 

This is the way that best makes sense to me, given the Framework and Limitation. You are right that the Framework should still really cost more than a bare spell. Perhaps that is Wizard E's reward for creatively dealing with the headache that is a Framework. Or maybe not. After all, you are talking to a guy who did like package bonuses back when they were a reward for standard concepts or creative ideas.

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Actually, we're also talking about basic math skills

Er, don't get your panties too bunched up, or you could wind up making a mistake which would be just a bit embarrassing ....

[Gary]

I don't get it. A single power is equivalent to buying a multipower with the "Can never change slots" limitation. I can't see how anyone can possibly argue that "full phase to change slots" is worth more points than this.

 

It should seem apparent to anyone that "Can never change slots" is a far more severe limitation than "Full phase to change slots".

 

Use your common sense.

[Narthon]

A single power is equivalent to buying a multipower with the "Can never change slots" limitation. I can't see how anyone can possibly argue that "full phase to change slots" is worth more points than this.

 

So, every power is a multipower with an 'external' -0.1 lim, so the pool+slot = power?

 

I will note that that argument instantly bans many powers.

If every solo power is a one-slot multipower, then any special power is banned, as they can't go in a framework.

In fact, that argument is an open paradox.

If every power is actually a framework, then every power is banned. energy blast is a one-slot multipower, but when you go to build it you're trying to put a framework in a framework.

At the very least, that argument bans any true framework, since you're putting a "one slot multipower" in, for example, an EC.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Narthon

So, every power is a multipower with an 'external' -0.1 lim, so the pool+slot = power?

 

I will note that that argument instantly bans many powers.

If every solo power is a one-slot multipower, then any special power is banned, as they can't go in a framework.

In fact, that argument is an open paradox.

If every power is actually a framework, then every power is banned. energy blast is a one-slot multipower, but when you go to build it you're trying to put a framework in a framework.

At the very least, that argument bans any true framework, since you're putting a "one slot multipower" in, for example, an EC.

 

I notice you're not denying that "Can never change slots" is a far more severe limitation than "Full phase to change slots".

 

I said that buying a straight EB was equivalent to a multipower that can't change slots. In game terms, they work exactly the same. Your one slot multipower argument is a red herring that obscures the real question:

 

Should "Can never change slots" cost more points than "Full phase to change slots"?

[prestidigitator]

Fine. Let's talk about Limitations to the reserve in general. Say character A takes an unmodified Power which costs x points. Say character B takes a Multipower with N ultimate slots, each of which has x active points and no Limitations of their own. If the reserve takes Limitations such that the divisor is D=1+L, then the total cost of the Multipower is:

 

x/D + N x/10

 

Now, why don't we impose the condition that B's Multipower must be more expensive than A's Power:

 

x/D + N x/10 > x

1/D + N/10 > 1

 

Clearly, this is satisfied (for positive D), if N>=10 or:

 

1/D > 1 - N/10

D < 1/(1 - N/10) = 10/(10 - N)

L < 10/(10 - N) - 1 = N/(10 - N)

 

and the condition becomes:

 

N = 1, L < 1/9 (N/A anyway)

N = 2, L < 1/4

N = 3, L < 3/7

N = 4, L < 2/3 (L < 1/2 works)

N = 5, L < 1

N = 6, L < 3/2

N = 7, L < 7/3 (L < 2 works)

N = 8, L < 4

N = 9, L < 9

N >= 10, L has no positive limit

 

So yes, your trivial and inconsequential example of two equal powers as ultimate slots in a Multipower should not allow a Limitation of -1/4 for this kind of thing. I wouldn't allow such a simplistic Multipower anyway.

 

Besides, if any individual slots took Limitations, such would not reduce the overall cost nearly so much as if a lone Power took the same value of Limitations (even a stupid -1/4; one-fifth of 50 vs. one-fifth of 5), so imposing a small Limitation on the reserve means nothing on a realistic Multipower. Non-ultimate slots make this even more obvious (5 of those slots would allow any value of Limitations).

[prestidigitator]

Originally posted by Gary

It should seem apparent to anyone that "Can never change slots" is a far more severe limitation than "Full phase to change slots".

Oh yeah. And,

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

Where are you getting these numbers? Certainly not from my example.

(50+5+5)/1.25=60/1.25=48

50+(5+5)/1.25=50+10/1.25=50+8=58

 

ACK! I'm still on page 3 with the 12d6 Flash and 12d6 EB! Sorry!

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

I don't get it.

 

Apparantly, you're not alone. But at least you're admitting it.

 

Originally posted by Gary

A single power is equivalent to buying a multipower with the "Can never change slots" limitation. I can't see how anyone can possibly argue that "full phase to change slots" is worth more points than this.

 

It should seem apparent to anyone that "Can never change slots" is a far more severe limitation than "Full phase to change slots".

 

Use your common sense.

 

Excuse me? The guy who's going to buy a Multipower that can never change its slots is telling ME to use common sense? This is a useless comparison - it's like buying an EB "Cannot be used as an attack action". There's no point.

 

Let's make a couple more comparisons. What does it cost to buy an attack which targets with ECV vs ECV, has a line of sight range with no modifiers, is invisible top all but mental senses and inflicts stun only damage versus Ego Defense. I'm sure you're way ahead of me here and have already concluded it's an Attack vs Limited Defenses (+1 1/2) with "Line of Sight Range" (+1/2), Invisihble Power Effects (+3/4) and "Attacks using ECV" (undefined). Even if switching to ECV costs nothing, that's 22.5 points per die. That's clearly how you buy this, right?

 

Is Ego Attack too generous?

 

Hmmm...let's try another construct. I want a 12d6 EB and a 12d6 Flash. That's 60 each. I don't want to violate campaign limits, so let's make them "Can't multipower attack" for -1/4, so that's 48 each, or 96 in total. So if I buy them in a multipower, with ultra slots, I should pay 96 points, right? But I pay 72. AND they can MPA with any attacks outside my multipower, so I actually got more power for less points. I can buy another 4 attack choices for not the 192 points it "should" cost, but another 24 points for four more Ultra slots.

 

So we shouldn't allow multipowers at all, I guess.

 

Is the whole system broken?

 

Let's return to your example (sort of - I still like 60 points). I buy a 12d6 EB for 60 points. I can use it whenever I want. The other guy buys a 12d6 EB/12d6 Flash multipower and defines each slot as requiring 1 phase to activate, after which it can be used as much as he wants (which, effectively, is 1 phase to switch slots). he gets a -1/4 limit, and pays 58 points.

 

In combat, I can fire my 12d6 EB any time I want. The other guy can fire a flash or an EB (more versatility), but it costs him a phase each time he changes, so he's losing actions. He can't use either one in the first phase (unless he spent a phase earlier allocating the points and guessed correctly). So I get an attack in the first phase and Stun my opponent. He doesn't, and gets stunned by his opponent. Hope he spent those extra 2 points on something that gets him out of this.

 

His multipower is not better than my EB. He has traded speed for versatility. By this math, he's lost effectiveness marginally (less than 4%) on the deal. That's close enough for me.

 

If it took him a full turn to allocate the points, he'd get a considerably bigger limitation, and pay way less for his two powers than I paid for my one. And he's more limited than me, despite his versatility possibly giving him an advantage at some point in time, so that's fair.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Excuse me? The guy who's going to buy a Multipower that can never change its slots is telling ME to use common sense? This is a useless comparison - it's like buying an EB "Cannot be used as an attack action". There's no point.

 

I notice that you're carefully not answering the question. Is "Can never change slots" more restrictive than "full phase to change slots"? It's a nice simple question that only requires a yes/no answer. Please answer it.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Let's make a couple more comparisons. What does it cost to buy an attack which targets with ECV vs ECV, has a line of sight range with no modifiers and inflicts stun only damage versus Ego Defense. I'm sure you're way ahead of me here and have already concluded it's an Attack vs Limited Defenses (+1 1/2) with "Line of Sight Range" (+1/2) and "Attacks using ECV" (undefined). Even if switching to ECV costs nothing, that's 15 points per die. That's clearly how you buy this, right?

 

Is Ego Attack too generous?

 

In some ways it is, but you're forgetting the effect of additional advantages. For example, it's a lot cheaper placing area effect on the first construct rather than ego attack.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Hmmm...let's try another construct. I want a 12d6 EB and a 12d6 Flash. That's 60 each. I don't want to violate campaign limits, so let's make them "Can't multipower attack" for -1/4, so that's 48 each, or 96 in total. So if I buy them in a multipower, with ultra slots, I should pay 96 points, right? But I pay 72. AND they can MPA with any attacks outside my multipower, so I actually got more power for less points. I can buy another 4 attack choices for not the 192 points it "should" cost, but another 24 points for four more Ultra slots. So we shouldn't allow multipowers at all, I guess.

 

There is a major difference in buying two separate powers rather than a multipower. If you take out the multipower, everything disappears at once. An attack destroying your multigun nukes both the flash and eb at the same time, whereas if you had both a blaster and a flash gun, only one can be taken out at the same time. Multipowers were strictly designed to be a cost savings over multiple powers. However, they were also strictly designed to cost more than a single power.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Is the whole system broken?

 

Let's return to your example (sort of - I still like 60 points). I buy a 12d6 EB for 60 points. I can use it whenever I want. The other guy buys a 12d6 EB/12d6 Flash multipower and defines each slot as requiring 1 phase to activate, after which it can be used as much as he wants (which, effectively, is 1 phase to switch slots). he gets a -1/4 limit, and pays 58 points.

 

Wrong. I think you're thinking of your personal house rule that you wouldn't allow a default power in a multipower. Let's take Tesuji's example instead with clips of different bullets where the default is whatever clip is in the gun to begin with. A legitimate real life multipower. Would you really ban that construct? According to your reasoning, since it takes a full phase to change slots, the limitation should apply to the reserve as well. Your house rule is a more severe limitation than the subject of this thread.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

In combat, I can fire my 12d6 EB any time I want. The other guy can fire a flash or an EB (more versatility), but it costs him a phase each time he changes, so he's losing actions. He can't use either one in the first phase (unless he spent a phase earlier allocating the points and guessed correctly). So I get an attack in the first phase and Stun my opponent. He doesn't, and gets stunned by his opponent. Hope he spent those extra 2 points on something that gets him out of this.

 

His multipower is not better than my EB. He has traded speed for versatility. By this math, he's lost effectiveness marginally (less than 4%) on the deal. That's close enough for me.

 

If it took him a full turn to allocate the points, he'd get a considerably bigger limitation, and pay way less for his two powers than I paid for my one. And he's more limited than me, despite his versatility possibly giving him an advantage at some point in time, so that's fair.

 

Red herring. You're comparing a straight EB to your house ruled multipower, not a multipower where it only takes a phase to change, but the default is whatever power was last set.

 

I feel sorry for your players if you wouldn't allow a pistol with regular, armor piercing, and hollow point bullets.

[Gary]

Originally posted by prestidigitator

Fine. Let's talk about Limitations to the reserve in general. Say character A takes an unmodified Power which costs x points. Say character B takes a Multipower with N ultimate slots, each of which has x active points and no Limitations of their own. If the reserve takes Limitations such that the divisor is D=1+L, then the total cost of the Multipower is:

 

x/D + N x/10

 

Now, why don't we impose the condition that B's Multipower must be more expensive than A's Power:

 

x/D + N x/10 > x

1/D + N/10 > 1

 

Clearly, this is satisfied (for positive D), if N>=10 or:

 

1/D > 1 - N/10

D < 1/(1 - N/10) = 10/(10 - N)

L < 10/(10 - N) - 1 = N/(10 - N)

 

and the condition becomes:

 

N = 1, L < 1/9 (N/A anyway)

N = 2, L < 1/4

N = 3, L < 3/7

N = 4, L < 2/3 (L < 1/2 works)

N = 5, L < 1

N = 6, L < 3/2

N = 7, L < 7/3 (L < 2 works)

N = 8, L < 4

N = 9, L < 9

N >= 10, L has no positive limit

 

So yes, your trivial and inconsequential example of two equal powers as ultimate slots in a Multipower should not allow a Limitation of -1/4 for this kind of thing. I wouldn't allow such a simplistic Multipower anyway.

 

You wouldn't allow a 2 slot multipower because it's too simplistic? And your N>=3 analysis doesn't matter because of course a multipower with 3 or more powers should cost more than a single power.

 

Originally posted by prestidigitator

Besides, if any individual slots took Limitations, such would not reduce the overall cost nearly so much as if a lone Power took the same value of Limitations (even a stupid -1/4; one-fifth of 50 vs. one-fifth of 5), so imposing a small Limitation on the reserve means nothing on a realistic Multipower. Non-ultimate slots make this even more obvious (5 of those slots would allow any value of Limitations).

 

That's a bogus comparison. A limitation on a single power obviously affects the entire power. A limitation on a single slot only affects that slot. All the rest of the slots wouldn't be affected at all by that limitation. Of course a limitation on an entire power would save more points than a limitation on part of a power.