Elemental Controls

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

No different from a power with "does not work in high magnetic fields" for -1/4. It's worth -1/4, but not more than that even though when it does occur, it's really debilitating.

 

I've seen a lot more characters witrh Drains than "Create intense magnetic field". He's pretty much got to be lured into one of those.

 

I believe the fire extinguisher example has been mentioned. How many times has the Human Torch been doused by a fireplug? Maybe you need a variable limitation depending on how common the ability to drain the power can be simulated without actually having a Drain.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

I don't mean any offense, but when a framework is used only once in 20 years, it is a sign that you consider them "broken". If you didn't have serious concerns about something, they would be used more often.

 

ummm...the most common reason a given ability isn't used is the perception that it costs too much for its benefits. Take Caverns and Cave Lizards 3.0, for example. How many people take the Toughness feat that grants them +3 hit points? Virtually no one, since there are so many more useful abilities you can get by taking a different feat.

 

Similarly, how many people take "Drain: Change Environment"? I don't think it's because the power is "broken".

 

As to the Superman/Batman debate, it's been seen before. I'll just note that I hate to make an argument that Hero can't duplicate something that's got 40+ years of comics history. The problem is that most Champs games are very combat-focused. In a game split evenly between noncombat encounters where Bats' skills and gadgets come to the fore, and combat where Supes does all the work, both players will be equally sidelined.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

15 EC force tendrils

15 12/12 force field 1/2 end

13 5" stretching 1/2 end no noncombat stretching (-1/4)

15 24" leap 1/2 end (36" total)

10 missile deflection all with +5 to roll cost end (-1/2)

9 360 degree spatial awareness +1 to perception roll cost end (-1/2) range limited to stretching (-1/4) touch sense group

 

I begin to understand your problem with EC's

 

Can I have an EC: Argonian Powers for my character, Last Son of Argon? How about EC: Powered Armor? This depends how tight you are on the special effects defining the EC, which has changed over the editions, becoming tighter each time. That seems to be in every rulebook, after a fashion, and then we get published characters with "EC: Powers Far Beyond Ordinary Earthmen" that stretch (shatter?) the boundaries of "common special effects".

 

 

As a simplistic sample restriction, I generally expect a typical EC will have some effect that would limit it whioch does not require a superpower. Farkling's examples of lead for radiation or a fire extinguisher for fire are good. Soak an electrical character down and

see how he does.

 

EDIT: An older character of my own probably should not have "EC: Absorbtion" either

 

If we want to get nitpicky, by the way, spatial awareness isn't ranged at all as written up in 5ed, but that's probably a translation difficulty as it was ranged in prior editions.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Farkling

/QUOTE HUGH/

"Farkling, you only allow one framework. What's your experience? Forced to choose, do your players tend significantly towards MP or EC, or is it a pretty even split?"

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Complete Writeups::

(1) EC :: Weather.

(1) Multipower

(1) Multipower

(1) Martial Arts/Skills combo. Multipower

(1) Martial Arts/Brick combo. slowly buying EC .

(1) BRICK...Purchased flat

 

Three multi's, two EC's - pretty even split. That's kind of what I'd expected.

 

From your comments, you had a pretty substantial hand in design assistance for each character, and made them mechanically effective within the constraints imposed.

 

It's just a demo, really, but seems to show that EC and Multi are pretty even concepts depending on the type of character. The EC will, as you've noted, have slower growth, but that's the cost of added flexibility (availability of more powers at the same time).

 

OK, I've posted my page...whoi's next?

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I've seen a lot more characters witrh Drains than "Create intense magnetic field". He's pretty much got to be lured into one of those.

 

I believe the fire extinguisher example has been mentioned. How many times has the Human Torch been doused by a fireplug? Maybe you need a variable limitation depending on how common the ability to drain the power can be simulated without actually having a Drain.

 

One thing I will admit, and from ECs I've seen I suspect is common to others, is I do not apply the same standard to EC as to NND. I apply the standard you indicate above to NNDs; essentially, a clever but normal person ought to be able to counter the attack with a little preparation or McGuyveresque opportunity. But with ECs the element needn't have such a common counte, and I think most people do this. However, this raises what may be a fundamental issue with mine and others' implementations of EC. (BTW, it should be noted that it seems many people don't create NNDs this way, though, and even the book examples, as you noted in another message re ECs Hugh, often have rather hard-to-obtain defenses for NND attacks, and I do NOT agree with that).

 

An idea would be to take the current EC framework and apply a "commonality" rule.

 

ECs which could be easily countered per the "normal person" measure (i.e., "very common counter to elemental") get the current normal application of discount - the control cost in its entirety.

 

ECs which are less common but not completely obtainable by regular people (and presumably fairly easily obtainable by secret organizations and smart-guy super-villains, that sort of level) get 1/2 (or 3/4 if you prefer) of the control cost discount. So if I have a 25 point control cost, my discount on each slot is 12 (if 1/2) or 19 (if 3/4) points.

 

ECs that are uncommon to counter get 1/4 (or 1/2 if you prefer) of the control cost discount. That might cover "intense radiation field"; so following the above example, each slot gets discounted 6 (if 1/4) or 12 (if 1/2) points.

 

Hey, I kind of like this...I know it would mess up my current players' EC costs though, although perhaps in a more balanced way. Will think about it.

 

Gary, since you raised much of this, what do you think of that construct? I suspect it still saves too many points for you...

[Zed-F]

I noticed that you just ignored the Q&A.

I didn't ignore anything in the Q&A; I answered every point you tried to raise on the basis of it. I pointed out that a reasonable GM will allow non-abusive powers with continuing charges in a multipower. I re-addressed the campaign limits issue that you brought up. I even used the very example from the Q&A that described an allowable continuing charges application in a multipower!

 

You're espousing a GM permission power, in the same way as adding 0 end powers such as armor and damage reduction in a EC would be.

I don't see these as being the same at all; from the impressions I get from the other GMs on the board, most of them would look a lot more closely at natively 0 END powers in an EC than they would at continuing charges in a multipower.

 

If that's the case, EC guy wins easily. A multi just can't compete if the EC allows 0 end powers in it.

A nice arbitrary statement with no evidence to back it up whatsoever. I've already demonstrated that there's no significant difference between the total points active at once using a multipower and an EC, the only difference is time to get them all up. Whether those powers cost END or not makes no difference to that fact, regardless of whether I allow powers that natively cost no END in an EC. (I don't, without good justification.)

 

However even under your scenario, the EC guy could just fly away under your scenario for a few minutes and let the charges run out.

Sure he could. In that case, he probably loses by default. What if MultiGuy and his buddies chase him and force him to engage? If the master villain is at the console of his doomsday device, activating it, when EC Guy finally reaches his lair, and the master villain pops some continuing charges or summons some minions, does he wait until the villain's charges run out or the minions get bored before trying to stop him? How does he know how long the charges will last? What if he has more than one charge? Please.

 

You appear to think that extra time to activate a power isn't really worth a limitation. If that's the case, I'll take a -1/4 limitation for full phase to turn on for my flight, mystery defense, and utility power. If it doesn't hinder you, it's only fair that it doesn't hinder me either. I could convincingly argue for a -1/2 limitation, since your extra powers take 2 full phases and locks out your regular attack and defenses in the process, but I'll be conservative.

 

With a -1/4 on 3 slots, I save 12 pts. Which 12 pts worth of slots are you going to remove from your multipower? It would be 21 pts worth of slots if I gave it a -1/2 limitation. There goes a bunch of your continuing charges powers.

 

Sure, you could take a -1/4 limitation on each of your EC powers that takes a full phase to activate. In that case, you're just as vulnerable to an ambush as MultiGuy, and you still have very limited flexibility and vulnerability to "drain one drain all." If you want to give up the ONLY advantage an EC has over a multipower just to save a few points, be my guest. To counter that, I'll just apply a -1/4 "drain one drain all" lim to the multipower, and I'll still be vastly ahead on flexibility. How's that? Even if I didn't, it would not be very hard to come up with a whole 12 points; a few points out of the reserve and readjusting the slots would be more than adequate to the task. I wouldn't necessarily need to give up any flexibility at all, unless I preferred to do that rather than lowering the reserve total.

 

According to the rules, in order to get a -1/2 limitation for activating your EC powers, you'd need to take 2 full phases to activate EACH power. Now you've gone from being vulnerable to ambushes to being completely toast in an ambush, as you can't even get your defenses up until the end of your second phase. If you want to take that lim, good luck, you're going to need it.

 

It's obvious that this is a sacred cow for you; as such, it's not worth my time to argue this any more with you. Your obsession with the idea that "Multis only have one power active at once, while ECs have all active at once" is blinding you to the reality that that statement is simply not true. Ciao, and good luck in your games.

 

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

"As the brave and heroic EC Man fled, the villainous MultiMan proceeded to steal the Crown Jewels and make good his escape. Film at 11"

 

Unless the opponent's primary or only goal is taking you down, they can easily succeed if you don't show up. How many scenarios (or comic plots) are based around various means of ensuring the heroes will be otherwise occupied while the villains achieve their goals? "Oh, just create an illusion of the guy activating a bunch of energy fields as EC Man flies in. He'll be out of there so fast you won't believe it."

 

An unfortunate fact of Player Characterhood is that you are far more often reacting to the opposition's plays than calling your own. If you're prepared to abandon the filed for a turn or two, that generally works quite well for them. Commonly, they were hoping you wouldn't show up in the first place anyway.

 

Let me ask you and everybody else on this thread. Would you, Zornwill, Farkling, AgentX, Badger, and anybody else who I'm missing, allow a 80 base point multipower that could have 140 pts worth of slots with continuing charges of movements, defenses, and utility powers and thus have 220 pts of powers up at the same time? While I'm at it, how many of you would allow 0 end powers in a EC?

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Ummm...seems to me he acknowledged it is a limitation - in an ambush, the character has a serious problem. I'd say an ambush is as common as having the villains take away my Magic Underwear IIF that grants all my superpowers quietly, from the background, or catching me outside my Hero ID. A 15- activation roll fails less than 5% of the time. All of these are -1/4 - a slight limitation on the power. Some come into play less frequently and have failry substantial consequences. Others (15- Act) come into play more often - 1 use in 20 - but have less severe implications (OK, I miss one shot). All are pretty minor limitations.

 

Actually, Zed seemed to think it was no problem at all for him to take 2 full phases and lock out his attacks and defenses to get all this stuff up, even with a GM permission only power. I was simply bringing the comparison to a even footing.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

For that matter, you don't seem to believe a lot of adjustment powers have a significant impact on people with EC's, yet you're still granting -1/4 for that restriction under your model. Presumably because it will happen sometimes, so it is at least a bit limiting. Or do you plan to redesign your campaign world and add a lot more characters with adjustment powers?

 

Adjustment powers are reasonably common, but in my experience they are mostly characteristic adjustment powers. There are very few drains of actual power.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I said:

 

Gary, the bottom line here is that you are unhappy with EC because each power beyond the first can be acquired at half price (a -1 limitation, for all intents and purposes), but you're OK giving a -9 limitation for each power beyond the first in an all-ultras multipower, or -4 for a variable configuration multipower. How reasonable is that?

 

 

 

Let's make that a "multipower Classic" - the 90 point one with a 60 reserve and 5 Ultra attack slots. The character can only use one attack slot at a time. But he can only attack once per phase anyway. The only thing he loses is multiple power attacks. Powers in an EC can't be used for multiple power attacks anyway.

 

Pay 90 points for those 5 attacks in a multipower, or pay double for all 5 in an EC. Or nerf both constructs and paty 300 points - over 3 times as much - for the privilege of multiple power attacking. Can I have a -2 limitation on my attack powers for "can't multiple power attack"? NO. Can I put all my attacks in a multipower and save more than the -2 would have given me? SURE

 

Yeah let's take that 5 power "classic". Only in games with DC caps would it be more effective than buying a straight power. One 18d6 attack, or choice of 5 60 pt attacks. It's not obvious which one is better, and thus a good indication that they are both reasonably balanced with each other. Now with a DC cap, using the other 30 pts saved, the 12d6 straight power guy could buy +15 dex with no speed increase, +10 dex +1 spd, or +3 spd. Now which is better?

 

A 12d6 EB 38 dex 5 spd

B 12d6 EB 33 dex 6 spd

C 12d6 EB 23 dex 8 spd

D multipower 23 dex 5 spd

 

I think that it's hard telling which one of the structures is better. And they all cost the same points. Again an indication of balance. That 30 pts seems to be the right price for 5 slots.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Now let's get back to your pet peeve - limitation stacking. We'll make the powers all come from OAF - Gun. So the multipower costs 45. If I get the -2 limitation instead, each power costs 15 (including the OAF), so I pay 75 in total. Your concern is that EC's "give points for free". How is this different?

 

It's easy. When I compare straight power guy to multiguy, I see tradeoffs. I see them as equal but with different strengths. For reference, see the above example and lots of examples sprinkled throughout this thread.

 

When I compare EC guy vs multiguy, I see someone who has everything multiguy has plus a bunch of extra points to play with to buy other stuff. That's free points in my book.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Yes. Much less likely that your assertion that the belt is easily (and therefore should be commonly) destroyed, though. It's now a lot tougher, since I have to overcome Batman's combat luck, plus the belt's defenses. And the belt, by virtue of smaller size, has a better DCV than Batman. I'd really rather take him out than just take out his belt if I'm lucky enough to connect. Which probably explains why most opponents don't go after the belt - especially when the belt's contents are principally geared for non-combat matters anyway, with a few notable exceptions like the Batarang (which I'm not sure is even in "the belt" - he always seems to have one, so it may just be "restrainable".

 

I think it's just the writers not wanting to mess with the utility belt. He's had enough scientific genius enemies who could destroy it if they wanted to.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I begin to understand your problem with EC's

 

Can I have an EC: Argonian Powers for my character, Last Son of Argon? How about EC: Powered Armor? This depends how tight you are on the special effects defining the EC, which has changed over the editions, becoming tighter each time. That seems to be in every rulebook, after a fashion, and then we get published characters with "EC: Powers Far Beyond Ordinary Earthmen" that stretch (shatter?) the boundaries of "common special effects".

 

I don't see how you can object to this EC conceptually. All powers are tied together and have a common special effect. This EC is very similar to the type of EC that Mr. Fantastic, Plastic Man, or Medusa would have. In fact, the Chinese Ghost in Ninja Hero has EC Hair Powers. This EC isn't anything like Argonian powers since it's the active control of an "element" just as the guidelines in the rulebook state. The only problem you seem to have with it is that it saves a buttload of points for powers that Lariat would like to have up all at the same time.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

As a simplistic sample restriction, I generally expect a typical EC will have some effect that would limit it whioch does not require a superpower. Farkling's examples of lead for radiation or a fire extinguisher for fire are good. Soak an electrical character down and

see how he does.

 

EDIT: An older character of my own probably should not have "EC: Absorbtion" either

 

Many "book" ECs don't have this restriction.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

If we want to get nitpicky, by the way, spatial awareness isn't ranged at all as written up in 5ed, but that's probably a translation difficulty as it was ranged in prior editions.

 

If I get rid of the range, it would cost me 1 pt more. Big deal. Since it's based on the touch sense group, it would still have a 10 meter range for her.

[Gary]

Originally posted by zornwil

One thing I will admit, and from ECs I've seen I suspect is common to others, is I do not apply the same standard to EC as to NND. I apply the standard you indicate above to NNDs; essentially, a clever but normal person ought to be able to counter the attack with a little preparation or McGuyveresque opportunity. But with ECs the element needn't have such a common counte, and I think most people do this. However, this raises what may be a fundamental issue with mine and others' implementations of EC. (BTW, it should be noted that it seems many people don't create NNDs this way, though, and even the book examples, as you noted in another message re ECs Hugh, often have rather hard-to-obtain defenses for NND attacks, and I do NOT agree with that).

 

An idea would be to take the current EC framework and apply a "commonality" rule.

 

ECs which could be easily countered per the "normal person" measure (i.e., "very common counter to elemental") get the current normal application of discount - the control cost in its entirety.

 

ECs which are less common but not completely obtainable by regular people (and presumably fairly easily obtainable by secret organizations and smart-guy super-villains, that sort of level) get 1/2 (or 3/4 if you prefer) of the control cost discount. So if I have a 25 point control cost, my discount on each slot is 12 (if 1/2) or 19 (if 3/4) points.

 

ECs that are uncommon to counter get 1/4 (or 1/2 if you prefer) of the control cost discount. That might cover "intense radiation field"; so following the above example, each slot gets discounted 6 (if 1/4) or 12 (if 1/2) points.

 

Hey, I kind of like this...I know it would mess up my current players' EC costs though, although perhaps in a more balanced way. Will think about it.

 

Gary, since you raised much of this, what do you think of that construct? I suspect it still saves too many points for you...

 

This approach would work for me, since it actually ties how many points you save with how much you expect to be limited by the structure. You get a reasonable (cost = value), unlike the current structure.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Zed-F

I didn't ignore anything in the Q&A; I answered every point you tried to raise on the basis of it. I pointed out that a reasonable GM will allow non-abusive powers with continuing charges in a multipower. I re-addressed the campaign limits issue that you brought up. I even used the very example from the Q&A that described an allowable continuing charges application in a multipower!

 

Yeah, the example is a fire and forget weapon, not a power that allows you active control of it after use. The Q&A specifically warns against allowing lots of continuing charge powers up simply for the sake of having lots of active points up at the same time.

 

Originally posted by Zed-F

I don't see these as being the same at all; from the impressions I get from the other GMs on the board, most of them would look a lot more closely at natively 0 END powers in an EC than they would at continuing charges in a multipower.

 

Have you read this thread? A number of posters here were griping about the no 0 end power restrictions and basically ignoring it.

 

 

Originally posted by Zed-F

A nice arbitrary statement with no evidence to back it up whatsoever. I've already demonstrated that there's no significant difference between the total points active at once using a multipower and an EC, the only difference is time to get them all up. Whether those powers cost END or not makes no difference to that fact, regardless of whether I allow powers that natively cost no END in an EC. (I don't, without good justification.)

 

Do you want me to redo the comparison with stuff like armor, damage reduction, and absorption in my sample EC?

 

Originally posted by Zed-F

Sure he could. In that case, he probably loses by default. What if MultiGuy and his buddies chase him and force him to engage? If the master villain is at the console of his doomsday device, activating it, when EC Guy finally reaches his lair, and the master villain pops some continuing charges or summons some minions, does he wait until the villain's charges run out or the minions get bored before trying to stop him? How does he know how long the charges will last? What if he has more than one charge? Please.

 

 

 

Sure, you could take a -1/4 limitation on each of your EC powers that takes a full phase to activate. In that case, you're just as vulnerable to an ambush as MultiGuy, and you still have very limited flexibility and vulnerability to "drain one drain all." If you want to give up the ONLY advantage an EC has over a multipower just to save a few points, be my guest. To counter that, I'll just apply a -1/4 "drain one drain all" lim to the multipower, and I'll still be vastly ahead on flexibility. How's that? Even if I didn't, it would not be very hard to come up with a whole 12 points; a few points out of the reserve and readjusting the slots would be more than adequate to the task. I wouldn't necessarily need to give up any flexibility at all, unless I preferred to do that rather than lowering the reserve total.

 

According to the rules, in order to get a -1/2 limitation for activating your EC powers, you'd need to take 2 full phases to activate EACH power. Now you've gone from being vulnerable to ambushes to being completely toast in an ambush, as you can't even get your defenses up until the end of your second phase. If you want to take that lim, good luck, you're going to need it.

 

First you were arguing that ambush situations were unlikely and that you weren't really restricted from having to take 2 phases while locking out your primary attack and defense to activate the continuing charge powers. Now you're arguing that it's a real restriction? Which is it?

 

If you lose 12 pts of slots, that's 120 pts of powers that you're losing. That's a major hit in flexibility. If you take from the reserve, you take a major hit in power, especially since all the slots are optimized to be 20 and 40 pt slots. If you have to remove 21 pts of powers, I shudder to think how you would have to gut it.

 

And I'm not limiting the entire EC as you state. I'm merely limiting 3 slots, movement, secondary defense, and utility power. After all, you were the one stating previously that nearly all battles allow multiguy ample time to activate his powers. A -1/4 limitation drops each slot from 20 to 16, hence a 12 pt savings for 3 slots. A -1/2 drops each slot from 20 to 13 and hence 21 total pts savings. There is no need at all to limit the entire EC.

 

Actually, this points out another major advantage for a EC. A limitation that only affects a slot, saves lots of points compared to a multipower. With a -1/2 limitation on a slot of the EC, I save 7 pts. With the multipower, you would save only a single point with the same limitation.

 

Originally posted by Zed-F

It's obvious that this is a sacred cow for you; as such, it's not worth my time to argue this any more with you. Your obsession with the idea that "Multis only have one power active at once, while ECs have all active at once" is blinding you to the reality that that statement is simply not true. Ciao, and good luck in your games.

 

I've given plenty of evidence and support that it is true. My examples have been based on rulebook examples, with no funky GM permission powers. You're seizing on a GM permission only power, and using that as the basis of your entire argument.

 

And good luck on your games as well.

[Gary]

Nobody has commented on my comparison of the Brick and MA using the same baseline. Is that an indication that all of you agree that Str is underpriced?

[Hugh Neilson]

My statement:

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I begin to understand your problem with EC's

 

Can I have an EC: Argonian Powers for my character, Last Son of Argon? How about EC: Powered Armor? This depends how tight you are on the special effects defining the EC, which has changed over the editions, becoming tighter each time. That seems to be in every rulebook, after a fashion, and then we get published characters with "EC: Powers Far Beyond Ordinary Earthmen" that stretch (shatter?) the boundaries of "common special effects".

 

Your response:

 

Originally posted by Gary

I don't see how you can object to this EC conceptually. All powers are tied together and have a common special effect. This EC is very similar to the type of EC that Mr. Fantastic, Plastic Man, or Medusa would have. In fact, the Chinese Ghost in Ninja Hero has EC Hair Powers. This EC isn't anything like Argonian powers since it's the active control of an "element" just as the guidelines in the rulebook state. The only problem you seem to have with it is that it saves a buttload of points for powers that Lariat would like to have up all at the same time.

 

So you WOULD allow "EC: Powers Far Beyond Those of any Ordinary Earthman", I take it. After all, Superman's powers largely arise from Earth's yellow sun. That's a common special effect. The comics have shown all his powers are drained when he is under a red sun, so he must have "drain one, drain all" - "Red Sun Burst" is the special effect for "Drain Kryptonian Powers", right?

 

For that matter, why not "EC: Mutant Powers"? The comics seem to provide lots of devices that drain all mutant powers at once.

 

Why require "EC: fire Powers" or "EC: Electrical Powers"? He can just take "EC: Energy Powers" and use fire, electricity, kinetic energy, etc.

 

Pretty soon, pretty much anyone can have an EC. Batman gets "EC: Training Powers" and/or "EC: Perfect Physical Specimen Powers". Hey, if we allow EVERYONE to save the points, then it's fair again, right? No one gets an unfair advantage because anyone with a character conception (which should be everyone) saves points.

 

Originally posted by Gary

Many "book" ECs don't have this restriction.

 

Funny...that seems to be what I said when I noted the rules require tight special effects, but published characters then seem to push (shatter?) the limits.

 

Besides, "book" EC's grant the point savings you complain about - better enforcing what constitutes "tight special effects" would seem as easy a means of controlling abuse as toasting the EC concept in general.

 

Of course, if you want to USE all those powers, you pay 9 END per phase. I assume the character also has an attack power, so that boosts it up (quite) a bit more, or soaks back the point benefits by making your attack zero END. A drawback present whether you have an EC or not if you want a lot of stuff up at the same time, of course.

 

I've got to agree with Zed F here. You've pretty much made this your baby, and you can't see any of the flaws in your reasoning. Have fun with it.

[Zed-F]

Let me ask you and everybody else on this thread. Would you, Zornwill, Farkling, AgentX, Badger, and anybody else who I'm missing, allow a 80 base point multipower that could have 140 pts worth of slots with continuing charges of movements, defenses, and utility powers and thus have 220 pts of powers up at the same time? While I'm at it, how many of you would allow 0 end powers in a EC?

 

First, it's already given that we are allowing up to 80 AP of defenses and 80 AP of attacks simultaneously, since the EC Guy specified has 2 40 AP attacks and 2 40 AP defenses. Suppose EC Guy has a EB and a flash for attacks, and Invisibility and Force Field for defenses. He can use all of these at once, assuming he can afford the END.

 

Here's a sample multipower. Let's be specific and use the example provided. The archetype I specified was a spellcaster.

 

80 point reserve

1. Summon 4x 150-point pets, or smaller amiable pets. (40 AP)

2. Change Environment: Call Fog (40 AP -- lots of fog.)

3. Levitate cantrip: 10" Flight with continuing charges lasting say 5 minutes. (20 AP) - probably spell components, might be expendable/recoverable

4. Invisibility spell: Invisibility to sight/sound, no fringe, with continuing charges lasting 5 minutes. (40 AP) -- again spell components, possibly expendable/recoverable

5. plus other stuff (EB, force field, etc.) that doesn't use continuing charges.

 

Supposing you don't like summon, just think of it as a 40 AP power that has a lasting effect on the environment, e.g. a transform, entangle, or whatever. The point we're discussing is the amount of AP active at once, not what specific power we're talking about.

 

Is this kind of power construct allowed in most people's games? If not, it significantly limits the kinds of multipowers that can be built.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

Let me ask you and everybody else on this thread. Would you, Zornwill, Farkling, AgentX, Badger, and anybody else who I'm missing, allow a 80 base point multipower that could have 140 pts worth of slots with continuing charges of movements, defenses, and utility powers and thus have 220 pts of powers up at the same time? While I'm at it, how many of you would allow 0 end powers in a EC?

 

Continuing charges: depends on the effect. Note that I was the one who challenged your Damage Aura: 4 continuing charges" construct in your EC, and you proceeded to criticize this based on published characters who have similar limitations. Apparantky, however, only Gary is allowed to use published constructs (like smoke grenades, say). or maybe such support is only permissable if used to support changes to the published rules, rather than support their reasonableness.

 

I don't see the big deal about 0 END powers in an EC, frankly. If they fit the conception, I'd be inclined to allow them, with the usual caveat on abuse. Really, how is it significantly different to buy Armor (not allowed) than Force Field, 0 END (allowed, same point cost). It's OK to have Healing, but not Aid, because a decision was made to remove the END cost on Aid so 10 points per die would be reasonable and we didn't need an awkward point cost. It's Ok to buy powers that cost END down to zero END, but not to have a power that costs no END to begin with. These limitations seem forced and awkward to me.

 

By the way, EC's are also a "GM Permission" power in that the GM should disallow EC's where a common link to drain them is unrealistic, or where the special effect is not tight enough. Note that FREd generally suggests "no racial EC's", and cites "Werewolf Powers" as a "GM Permission" example, possibly allowed only because everyone knows what a werewolf can do.

 

Originally posted by Gary

Adjustment powers are reasonably common, but in my experience they are mostly characteristic adjustment powers. There are very few drains of actual power.

 

So, to repeat the question, why will you allow a limitation for "drain one, drain all". As a default, characteristics don't belong in an EC, remember?

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

My statement:

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I begin to understand your problem with EC's

 

Can I have an EC: Argonian Powers for my character, Last Son of Argon? How about EC: Powered Armor? This depends how tight you are on the special effects defining the EC, which has changed over the editions, becoming tighter each time. That seems to be in every rulebook, after a fashion, and then we get published characters with "EC: Powers Far Beyond Ordinary Earthmen" that stretch (shatter?) the boundaries of "common special effects".

 

Your response:

 

 

 

So you WOULD allow "EC: Powers Far Beyond Those of any Ordinary Earthman", I take it. After all, Superman's powers largely arise from Earth's yellow sun. That's a common special effect. The comics have shown all his powers are drained when he is under a red sun, so he must have "drain one, drain all" - "Red Sun Burst" is the special effect for "Drain Kryptonian Powers", right?

 

For that matter, why not "EC: Mutant Powers"? The comics seem to provide lots of devices that drain all mutant powers at once.

 

Why require "EC: fire Powers" or "EC: Electrical Powers"? He can just take "EC: Energy Powers" and use fire, electricity, kinetic energy, etc.

 

Pretty soon, pretty much anyone can have an EC. Batman gets "EC: Training Powers" and/or "EC: Perfect Physical Specimen Powers". Hey, if we allow EVERYONE to save the points, then it's fair again, right? No one gets an unfair advantage because anyone with a character conception (which should be everyone) saves points.

 

This character is EC Force Tendrils, not EC Mutant. How is this any different from EC Telekinetic or EC Hair Control except that Force Tendrils have a shorter (5") range? It's an active control of an "element". Would you disallow EC Telekinesis in your game? Would you disallow Medusa's EC Hair Control in your game? Lariat has a tight special effect that explains all the powers. I think I've adequetly explained how each power works.

 

I'm surprised you would allow any EC in your game if you wouldn't allow a character as well defined as Medusa in your game.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Funny...that seems to be what I said when I noted the rules require tight special effects, but published characters then seem to push (shatter?) the limits.

 

Besides, "book" EC's grant the point savings you complain about - better enforcing what constitutes "tight special effects" would seem as easy a means of controlling abuse as toasting the EC concept in general.

 

First you were arguing that ECs weren't abusive based simply on powers and cost structures. Now you're saying that they are abusive, and therefore should be controlled tightly. Which is it? And I disagree that Lariat is in any way pushing the limits of a EC. Unless you're willing to say that every Stretching, Telekinetic, or Hair Control EC is pushing the limits.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Of course, if you want to USE all those powers, you pay 9 END per phase. I assume the character also has an attack power, so that boosts it up (quite) a bit more, or soaks back the point benefits by making your attack zero END. A drawback present whether you have an EC or not if you want a lot of stuff up at the same time, of course.

 

Actually, the EC costs only 3 end under normal circumstances. She obviously only uses missile deflection as necessary, and the spacial awareness is used for situations such as when she's been blinded, needs to see around a corner, or is simply very wary of an ambush. Combined with 66 end and 15 rec, she does just fine.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I've got to agree with Zed F here. You've pretty much made this your baby, and you can't see any of the flaws in your reasoning. Have fun with it.

 

I could say the same thing about you.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

Nobody has commented on my comparison of the Brick and MA using the same baseline. Is that an indication that all of you agree that Str is underpriced?

 

For me it's an indication that it's another "muddy the water" item. I don't see a disproportionate number of players choosing Brick characters any more than I see a disproportionate number choosing characters with EC's. If there were dramatic price discounts, I would expect far more players to choose those options.

 

I think STR is underpriced in the context of Fantasy Hero, where virtually all weaponry benefits from higher STR, weaponry costs no points and virtually all characters will carry a weapon.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

Actually, this points out another major advantage for a EC. A limitation that only affects a slot, saves lots of points compared to a multipower. With a -1/2 limitation on a slot of the EC, I save 7 pts. With the multipower, you would save only a single point with the same limitation.

 

The EC effectively got a -1 limitation to add a power. The Multi slot got -4 or -9 for "lockout", remember? The more limitations you stack, the less effective they become.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Zed-F

First, it's already given that we are allowing up to 80 AP of defenses and 80 AP of attacks simultaneously, since the EC Guy specified has 2 40 AP attacks and 2 40 AP defenses. Suppose EC Guy has a EB and a flash for attacks, and Invisibility and Force Field for defenses. He can use all of these at once, assuming he can afford the END.

 

Here's a sample multipower. Let's be specific and use the example provided. The archetype I specified was a spellcaster.

 

80 point reserve

1. Summon 4x 150-point pets, or smaller amiable pets. (40 AP)

2. Change Environment: Call Fog (40 AP -- lots of fog.)

3. Levitate cantrip: 10" Flight with continuing charges lasting say 5 minutes. (20 AP) - probably spell components, might be expendable/recoverable

4. Invisibility spell: Invisibility to sight/sound, no fringe, with continuing charges lasting 5 minutes. (40 AP) -- again spell components, possibly expendable/recoverable

5. plus other stuff (EB, force field, etc.) that doesn't use continuing charges.

 

Supposing you don't like summon, just think of it as a 40 AP power that has a lasting effect on the environment, e.g. a transform, entangle, or whatever. The point we're discussing is the amount of AP active at once, not what specific power we're talking about.

 

Is this kind of power construct allowed in most people's games? If not, it significantly limits the kinds of multipowers that can be built.

 

What I would allow and what I think most people would allow would be "fire and forget" slots in a multi such as smoke grenades or napalm or force wall. I would be very hesitant to allow stuff like the flight since you still have active control of it even after switching slots.

[Zed-F]

Ok, I define the flight as "choose a destination, and the levitate spell takes me there at its best half-move speed, until I cancel it or it runs out of juice."

 

Happy?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

I'm surprised you would allow any EC in your game if you wouldn't allow a character as well defined as Medusa in your game.

 

There is a difference between prohibiting the character and denying them an EC. First, you argue that EC's are unfairly beneficial in all cases. Then you argue that pretty much any special effect one wishes to apply can be applied. Should they be restricted, or shouldn't they? Tighter control over SFX is one way to restrict them - and a method that does not require significant change to the mechanics.

 

First you were arguing that ECs weren't abusive based simply on powers and cost structures. Now you're saying that they are abusive, and therefore should be controlled tightly. Which is it? And I disagree that Lariat is in any way pushing the limits of a EC. Unless you're willing to say that every Stretching, Telekinetic, or Hair Control EC is pushing the limits.

 

It's interesting that you argue for restrictions to "continuing charges" powers because the FAQ says the GM should watch for abuse, but not for any restrictions to EC's, which FREd says should be watched for abuse. Now I haven't read through all the 5th Ed characters - any example of a published character with continuing charges?

 

I know the FAQ discusses several times whether a power with lasting effects should "vanish" when the multipower point reserve is shifted. Adjustment powers and summon, for example, get this question. The rule is that they do not. Would you deny Summon with continuing charges because now there's a statement that says "watch for abuse", but allow a multipower with 10 different Summons without charges which is used to summon 10 powerful helpers, one at a time?

 

Originally posted by Gary

Actually, the EC costs only 3 end under normal circumstances. She obviously only uses missile deflection as necessary, and the spacial awareness is used for situations such as when she's been blinded, needs to see around a corner, or is simply very wary of an ambush. Combined with 66 end and 15 rec, she does just fine.

 

How is it a big advantage to EC over Multi that you can use all the powers at the same time, if you rarely if ever need or want to use all the powers at the same time? You're down on ZedF for having a -1/4 limit for something that almost never happens, but you're OK with a multipower giving a -4 or -9 limitation for something that almost never happens. Mr. Apple, meet Mr. Orange!

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

For me it's an indication that it's another "muddy the water" item. I don't see a disproportionate number of players choosing Brick characters any more than I see a disproportionate number choosing characters with EC's. If there were dramatic price discounts, I would expect far more players to choose those options.

 

I think STR is underpriced in the context of Fantasy Hero, where virtually all weaponry benefits from higher STR, weaponry costs no points and virtually all characters will carry a weapon.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

For me it's an indication that it's another "muddy the water" item. I don't see a disproportionate number of players choosing Brick characters any more than I see a disproportionate number choosing characters with EC's. If there were dramatic price discounts, I would expect far more players to choose those options.

 

I think STR is underpriced in the context of Fantasy Hero, where virtually all weaponry benefits from higher STR, weaponry costs no points and virtually all characters will carry a weapon.

 

As I said, that's because of GM enforced genre and balance limitations.

 

As my example showed, using exactly the same points and exactly the same OCV/DCV, DC, Def, MA maneuvers, and Spd, the brick does far better than the MA. I matched everything except that the brick used Str and the MA used martial arts.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Gary

This approach would work for me, since it actually ties how many points you save with how much you expect to be limited by the structure. You get a reasonable (cost = value), unlike the current structure.

 

GASP - we might be agreeing!

 

EDIT - and that also means Hugh's contention regarding how easy it is to deal with an EC is also where we'd agree the current EC "works" on a points-balanced basis - I think.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Zed-F

Ok, I define the flight as "choose a destination, and the levitate spell takes me there at its best half-move speed, until I cancel it or it runs out of juice."

 

Happy?

 

Yes I am, except for the cancel at will part. Smoke grenades and napalm can't be canceled at will. This form of levitation would be ok in my book since you can't make turns, go noncombat, go at full speed, dive for cover, or have any control over it. It'd basically be an autopilot.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

As I said, that's because of GM enforced genre and balance limitations.

 

As my example showed, using exactly the same points and exactly the same OCV/DCV, DC, Def, MA maneuvers, and Spd, the brick does far better than the MA. I matched everything except that the brick used Str and the MA used martial arts.

 

Of course, the martial artist would NEVER consider using soecial maneuvers which permit him to do things pure STR cannot. That would be silly, wouldn't it? Better he should try to duplicate a Brick's abilities, but not actually be Brick.

 

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised - your other examples want to use a Multipower to do what an EC does best, rather than focus on what a multipower does best.

 

There are certainly GM enforced items in the game. That's why we need all the stop signs, caution signs, "watch for abuses" comments, etc. etc. etc. The game's flexibility makes these necessray to imnpose some restraints.

 

But if bricks are truly overpowered because STR is cheap, I would suggest that, when I set a campaign ground rule of "Everyone selects their character independently", I would get a disproportionate number of Brick proposals. I've done that. Getting two Brick proposals is pretty rare. Everyone (or even a large majority) having an EC is rare.

 

[before we start that thread, the idea is "send a brief character outline" indepoendently - if someone else already took that schtick, I'll reject the later one. But I have never had to reject a Brick. I have had a group co-ordinate character selection and argue about who would play the Brick - everyone thought we should have one, but no one wanted to play him.]