Power Discussion: Barrier

[Sean Waters]

The new power 'Barrier' has been highlighted as part of the 'taster posts' and is an interesting power - it has me wondering though, as to some of the application.

 

Barrier is an instant power, which is nice in that it becomes 'fire and forget' - you do not have to worry about maintaining it. That raises a couple of rules application concerns though:

 

1. Can you voluntarily turn it off? The book says you can make a Barrier that requires maintenance by adding the limitation 'Costs END'. That causes me...some concern. What, exactly is the effect of that? It turns off if you don't pay END, presumably - BUT it makes it really very awkward to then buy a 0 END version of Barrier that you can turn off at will (you need 'Costs END' and '0 END' which was - and as far as I know still is verboten). It also impacts on the second point, below...

 

2. Can you reinforce a Barrier? A barrier acts like a real wall - and can be built with BODY (it is a good idea to do so generally as Body is pretty cheap). Once it is damaged, can you reinforce it or do you need to build another wall? Given that walls are (minimum) 1/2 m thick - that may not always be practical.

 

If 'Costs END' means the barrier can be turned off, does it also mean it can be turned up? It is almost like making the Barrier 'constant' (at least in some respects) but using a limitation to do this.

 

That makes things a bit unclear.

 

On the positive side, Barrier looks REALLY useful for some concepts: it is (almost) a 'creation' power for Hero that does not rely on the Transform mechanic. I can think of a number of adders I'll almost certainly house rule: +5 to make the barrier thinner, +5 to make the barrier into very complicated shapes (say a virtually indestructible jewel box with a lock).

 

Barrier is also an Entangle killer: for the same points you can have a much more powerful barrier (small 'b') surrounding your enemy. Entangle will still be useful against martial artists (if you deny MA use tot he entangled) and some target's with an OAF. Also - and I'm not sure how this works - Barrier *should* be anchored to the ground, so you *possibly* can not englobe a character in the air - or if you can I'm not sure what effect it has.

 

There's also the issue that barriers are 'anchored' to the ground. I'm not clear what that would mean if you, for instance, set up an englobing barrier around a flier standing on sand - they may not be able to break through the barrier, but they could sure lift it out of sand.

 

Barriers, despite being 'real' do not appear to have 'mass' rules.

 

That might have clarified a number of issues if each 1mx1mx1/2m section weighed (say) 50 kg (with adders for making it lighter or heavier).

 

Interesting power - I see a lot of stimulating discussion

[Sean Waters]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

Also - whilst I witter - Barrier can have flash and mental and power defence.

 

I wonder whether (if it has flash defence) a flash can 'take it down' if the flash would not normally cause Body. From context I suspect not - but that is another change from the previous 'Force Wall' power, if I'm right.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

Barriers, despite being 'real' do not appear to have 'mass' rules.

 

That might have clarified a number of issues if each 1mx1mx1/2m section weighed (say) 50 kg (with adders for making it lighter or heavier).

 

I think this was intentional. The weight of a Barrier depends on its SFX.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

I think this was intentional. The weight of a Barrier depends on its SFX.

 

 

**gaack**

 

That's...questionable at best. Weight* is something with a real value in combat and in the game and can have a massive effect (pun intended). It would have taken no effort to define that and make the whole power more useable when such difficulties occur.

 

 

 

*or more properly mass

[ghost-angel]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

While it may actually have been a house rule (and a long standing and common one as I have yet to play with a group that didn't allow it) - we always allowed the creator of an Entangle to dismiss it as well. I suspect we will be using the same thing for Barrier going forward.

 

But quite frankly, it makes Common Sense to me.

 

Weight of Barriers is addressed 6E1 p171-172.

 

Barrier Vs Entangle:

Entangle reduces a character to 0DCV; Barrier does not

Entangle prevents use of Accessable Foci and anything made Restrainable; Barrier does not.

Entangles can apply Takes No Damage From Attacks; Barriers cannot (this last one coupled with the fact that Entangles reduce a target to 0DCV make them more dangerous).

Entangles don't take up nearly as much space (good for enclosed areas).

 

There are trade offs in functionality and it's not merely a pure defenses to defenses comparison.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

That's...questionable at best. Weight* is something with a real value in combat and in the game and can have a massive effect (pun intended). It would have taken no effort to define that and make the whole power more useable when such difficulties occur.

 

 

 

*or more properly mass

 

I can't think of a situation where the mass of a Barrier would have an effect that was always beneficial or always detrimental. (A heavier Barrier would do more damage if dropped on an opponent, but the rules prohibit this.)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

I can't think of a situation where the mass of a Barrier would have an effect that was always beneficial or always detrimental. (A heavier Barrier would do more damage if dropped on an opponent' date=' but the rules prohibit this.)[/quote']

 

 

Fair enough, but it will ahve beneficial and detrimental effects and they are not necessarily balanced - that is why it is best to set a default weight and then allow the player to change it. Generally very light barriers might be useful to lay across the surface of a swamp or burning roof, very heavy ones good for dropping on people. I'd much rather see a default value though than 'it depends on sfx': that is back to front. You decide the sfx than you decide what the mass should be based on that, and you build it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

While it may actually have been a house rule (and a long standing and common one as I have yet to play with a group that didn't allow it) - we always allowed the creator of an Entangle to dismiss it as well. I suspect we will be using the same thing for Barrier going forward.

 

But quite frankly, it makes Common Sense to me.

 

Weight of Barriers is addressed 6E1 p171-172.

 

Barrier Vs Entangle:

Entangle reduces a character to 0DCV; Barrier does not

Entangle prevents use of Accessable Foci and anything made Restrainable; Barrier does not.

Entangles can apply Takes No Damage From Attacks; Barriers cannot (this last one coupled with the fact that Entangles reduce a target to 0DCV make them more dangerous).

Entangles don't take up nearly as much space (good for enclosed areas).

 

There are trade offs in functionality and it's not merely a pure defenses to defenses comparison.

 

 

Spiderman can not turn off his web entangles, unless he uses some sort of chemical spray (a separate power - certainly not some sort of 'off switch), Iceman can not turn off his ice blocks, Glue Gal cannot simply release opponents by wishing it so (OK, not a recognised figure, I grant ).

 

Given time, out of combat, sure - you can break anyone out of an entangle but that is very different from allowing an instant, at will release (if your entangle accidentally hits a friend, for example).

 

I acknowledged that there were situations where entangle is superior to barrier for holding opponents BUT I maintain that barrier is still generally more efficacious and I'm surprised that Entangle was not made cheaper, or in some other way more effective, as it has lost functionality (its own barrier ability). It tends to only be particularly useful against very specific opponents or for the metarule that it reduces an opponent to DCV 0 until they breakout: 1d6 entangle (hex) v speedsters and martial artists, anyone?

 

Hell, it might have been enough to stick with the same price and allow entangles to be turned off or reinforced without an additional attack action - and apply limitations if you can not: they did not have to be made tougher.

[Beowulfe]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

2. Can you reinforce a Barrier? A barrier acts like a real wall - and can be built with BODY (it is a good idea to do so generally as Body is pretty cheap). Once it is damaged, can you reinforce it or do you need to build another wall? Given that walls are (minimum) 1/2 m thick - that may not always be practical.

 

The rules state that you to reinforce a barrier, you just recreate it. The new barrier basically replaces the one that is there. No extra space is required.

[Hierax]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

Hmm, Entangle could just be a modifier/adder to Barrier like Accurate or Explosion are to AoE.

[nexus]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

Hmm' date=' Entangle could just be a modifier/adder to Barrier like Accurate or Explosion are to AoE.[/quote']

 

When I first heard of the Barrier Power I assumed Entangle was subsumed into Barrier.

[archermoo]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

As to the dismissibility of Barriers, we have our answer:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74783

[ghost-angel]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

I like the adder solution, elegant. Though I'm moderately inclined to say it's a -1/4 Limitation "not dismissable" instead.

 

Meh.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

The rules state that you to reinforce a barrier' date=' you just recreate it. The new barrier basically replaces the one that is there. No extra space is required.[/quote']

 

You can plug a hole in a barrier, but not 'reinforce' it until there is a hole in it, if I'm reading the text right.

[lemming]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

I see players destroying economies with Create Barrier: Gold Or at least the gold based ones. I see steel being way more useful.

[ajackson]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

For comparison to Entangle, I made some suppositions about what modifiers would be required to Barrier. The following come up:

 

• Immovable: barrier globes can be moved from inside, entangles cannot. Arguably it is possible to do movethroughs while englobed, using the barrier as a weapon, though this will only be useful to a limited subset of characters. Probably +1/4 to make a bubble 'attached' and immovable.
  
• Reduced DCV: entangles reduce DCV, barriers do not; this can be significant if you have a way to fire through the barrier (indirect, entangles that don't take damage, or one-way transparent walls). Probably +1/4 for half DCV, +1/2 for 0 DCV.
  
• Restrains: entangles prevent using OAFs and restrainable powers, barriers do not, though in many cases the only thing you can do with the restrainable power is try to blow your way out of the barrier. Probably +1/4 with a prerequisite of reduced DCV.
  
• Not Area: entangle targets DCV, englobing targets an area. For simplicity we'll say this removes the base cost of the barrier, though it's technically removal of an advantage.
  
• Bubbles Only: barrier can form shapes other than bubbles.
  

So, it's on the order of +1 to turn a barrier into an entangle and you'd pay directly for the defense and body of the barrier. A 1d6 entangle has 1 PD, 1 ED, and 1 Body, for a base cost of 4, or 8 with a +1 advantage, with a limitation of a single form.

 

Overall, I'd probably prefer something like:

Barrier: 1 point per meter of width, height, and thickness, 2 points per point of PD, ED, or Body. No base cost. A barrier with a dimension of zero can be treated as merely thin (under half a meter) or as zero thickness (however, the edge is not treated as sharp). This build means an effective bubble (4m*4m, 60 active) drops from something like 13PD,13ED,12Bod to around 9PD,9ED,8BOD.

[GamePhil]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

When I first heard of the Barrier Power I assumed Entangle was subsumed into Barrier.

 

There would have been some benefit if it had been, since then some odd Active Point things would be eliminated. For instance, the use of a Barrier to cage a target can be bought as an Entangle with several Advantages and Limitations that come out to roughly the same real cost, but around twice as many AP.

 

The drawback is that it would make Barrier more complex and eliminate the straightforward Entangle, neither of which are really desirable. Ultimately probably better to have the GM reign it in when necessary.

 

As to the dismissibility of Barriers, we have our answer:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74783

 

While we have an official answer, I'm thinking of allowing a +0 Advantage to allow them to be shut off, balanced by them being Dispelable (rather than the -1/4 for just making it Dispelable).

[ghost-angel]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

For comparison to Entangle, I made some suppositions about what modifiers would be required to Barrier. The following come up:

 

• Immovable: barrier globes can be moved from inside, entangles cannot. Arguably it is possible to do movethroughs while englobed, using the barrier as a weapon, though this will only be useful to a limited subset of characters. Probably +1/4 to make a bubble 'attached' and immovable.
  
• Reduced DCV: entangles reduce DCV, barriers do not; this can be significant if you have a way to fire through the barrier (indirect, entangles that don't take damage, or one-way transparent walls). Probably +1/4 for half DCV, +1/2 for 0 DCV.
  
• Restrains: entangles prevent using OAFs and restrainable powers, barriers do not, though in many cases the only thing you can do with the restrainable power is try to blow your way out of the barrier. Probably +1/4 with a prerequisite of reduced DCV.
  
• Not Area: entangle targets DCV, englobing targets an area. For simplicity we'll say this removes the base cost of the barrier, though it's technically removal of an advantage.
  
• Bubbles Only: barrier can form shapes other than bubbles.
  

So, it's on the order of +1 to turn a barrier into an entangle and you'd pay directly for the defense and body of the barrier. A 1d6 entangle has 1 PD, 1 ED, and 1 Body, for a base cost of 4, or 8 with a +1 advantage, with a limitation of a single form.

 

Overall, I'd probably prefer something like:

Barrier: 1 point per meter of width, height, and thickness, 2 points per point of PD, ED, or Body. No base cost. A barrier with a dimension of zero can be treated as merely thin (under half a meter) or as zero thickness (however, the edge is not treated as sharp). This build means an effective bubble (4m*4m, 60 active) drops from something like 13PD,13ED,12Bod to around 9PD,9ED,8BOD.

 

Why are you reinventing the wheel again?

 

Entangle is still in the system.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

Let me put it this way: I'd much rather be an MA englobed in a Barrier, where I can use a PEN or AP attack to escape, than be caught in an Entangle where I can't even move. To me Barrier seems to be much more of an upgrade to Force Wall than a replacement for Entangle.

 

This seems to me to be one of the coolest (if not the coolest) new Powers in 6E.

[GamePhil]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

Let me put it this way: I'd much rather be an MA englobed in a Barrier, where I can use a PEN or AP attack to escape, than be caught in an Entangle where I can't even move. To me Barrier seems to be much more of an upgrade to Force Wall than a replacement for Entangle.

 

This seems to me to be one of the coolest (if not the coolest) new Powers in 6E.

 

Well, sort of: if using a 60 AP limit, you can get a very tough Barrier for the same cost as a 6d6 6PD/ED Entangle. That's the AP thing I was talking about: a Barrier used to trap a target is like a 12d6 12 PD/ED Entangle with 1 Hex Accurate and some Limitations. Pretty sure that in general Barriers will need to be watched with some caution if they're to be used this way.

 

Of course, it could be argued that that's a flaw with using AP limits to keep things in check, and I still love this Power, but there you go.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

Let me put it this way: I'd much rather be an MA englobed in a Barrier, where I can use a PEN or AP attack to escape, than be caught in an Entangle where I can't even move. To me Barrier seems to be much more of an upgrade to Force Wall than a replacement for Entangle.

 

This seems to me to be one of the coolest (if not the coolest) new Powers in 6E.

 

It's never been clear whether you can use martial arts to break out of an entangle: possibly not - I don't know how people tend to rule it. It is arguable either way.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

It's never been clear whether you can use martial arts to break out of an entangle: possibly not - I don't know how people tend to rule it. It is arguable either way.

Well, IME, for the most part Entangles are viewed as something which totally immobilizes the character unless they have Limitations such as those used to represent handcuffs or the like; and it's pretty hard to use a high power martial art attack when you can't do much more than wiggle.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

I agree with Trebuchet here - Martial Arts require a bit of space, and ability to move. I consider that part of the cost break one gets for buying maneuvers.

[Beowulfe]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

But not all martial arts require impact. Can you use martial escape? That is a maneuver specifically designed for escaping being grabbed so presumably you are using leverage to get more power out of your escape attempt. I can see the same applying to an entangle.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Power Discussion: Barrier

 

I would say definitely, that's part of the intent of the maneuver really.

 

But a Martial Strike (especially one defined as a high kick) - I wouldn't allow it.

 

Maybe Bruce Lee's One Inch Punch.

 

As usual, I tend to fall back on SFX interaction in these cases and look at what's going on In The Game before making a final rule - which means it's all case by case for me. (I think that drives Sean Waters insane...)