Elemental Controls

[Gary]

Originally posted by prestidigitator

Who says energy projector powers are more suitable for Elemental Controls than martial arts related ones? I didn't. I base it on how well the powers fit together, and whether they match the concept of the character well or not. I wouldn't allow the Martial Arts themselves to go in an EC (they are skills--and already pretty good cost-wise), but a Martial Arts Elemental Control like, say:

• Missile Deflection
  
• Damage Reduction, Concentrate
  
• Leaping
  
• RKA: Shuriken

wIth appropriate Advantages/Limitations, a good description, and other skills, etc., which fit well? Why not?

 

It just so happens that a heck of a lot of Batman's powers go right into a Multipower, if not a Variable Power Pool, anyway; that is Framework enough, if you ask me.

 

1) Missile deflection and Damage Reduction can't be placed in an EC.

 

2) Considering he has probably 5" or less of superleap, it wouldn't be a very good EC.

 

3) Please explain to me how draining his Batarangs would drain his leap, missile deflection, and damage reduction at the same time.

[Rene]

Originally posted by Gary

The problem with the conception argument for EC's is that it rewards certain conceptions over other conceptions. It gives a huge savings to energy projectors, and nothing to most martial artists.

 

Is anyone really going to argue that the Human Torch is a much better conception than Batman and deserves to save oodles of points?

 

But consider that Characteristics, Overall Skill Levels, and Martial Arts are REALLY cheap in HERO. So Batman is already being rewarded in a way, he don't need a EC when he can get a 15 OCV, 12d6 attack probably paying much less than the Human Torch would for his Energy Blast.

 

There is no major superhero concept that isn't rewarded in some fashion in HERO. Bricks and Martial Artists are rewarded by cheap Chars. Energy Projector and Mentalists by Frameworks. Power Suits by Focus Lim...

 

ECs make sense in a backward kind of way in that they seem to give a fighting chance for characters that aren't characteristic-based.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Rene

But consider that Characteristics, Overall Skill Levels, and Martial Arts are REALLY cheap in HERO. So Batman is already being rewarded in a way, he don't need a EC when he can get a 15 OCV, 12d6 attack probably paying much less than the Human Torch would for his Energy Blast.

 

There is no major superhero concept that isn't rewarded in some fashion in HERO. Bricks and Martial Artists are rewarded by cheap Chars. Energy Projector and Mentalists by Frameworks. Power Suits by Focus Lim...

 

ECs make sense in a backward kind of way in that they seem to give a fighting chance for characters that aren't characteristic-based.

 

Let's take a typical MA. He pays 10 pts for 20 str, pays 20 pts for a martial arts package, and 16 pts for +4 damage classes. That's 46 pts already, of which he pays straight most of the time. Assuming he uses offensive strike to get to 12d6, he needs to pay at least 4 more pts to cancel out the OCV penalties. That's 50 pts for a 12d6 attack with no range. That's not much if any, of a savings compared to an EB's multipower if you factor in the range that the EB has. And it's a lot easier to place limitations on the multipower to save points for the EB.

 

Now you're telling me that the EB can place his defenses and movements in an EC and save nearly 50% while the MA has to buy them straight?

[prestidigitator]

Originally posted by Gary

1) Missile deflection and Damage Reduction can't be placed in an EC.

Please see my previous post. I would allow them if they fit the concept well. That is the whole "conception" issue we are arguing about, dude.

2) Considering he has probably 5" or less of superleap, it wouldn't be a very good EC.

Please sidetrack the argument by picking on minor details of an example I threw together quickly to illustrate a point. Please?

3) Please explain to me how draining his Batarangs would drain his leap, missile deflection, and damage reduction at the same time.

Hmm. Don't know. If this were a metaphysically powered martial artist, I would answer, "Perhaps by weakening his chi." You are free to use your imagination too, you know. I've never gone much for the, "Draining one power in an EC drains them all," anyway, although I guess it would depend on the circumstances.

 

Concept and Special Effects are what the game is about. That's why the system takes care of everything else.

[Gary]

Originally posted by prestidigitator

Please see my previous post. I would allow them if they fit the concept well. That is the whole "conception" issue we are arguing about, dude.

 

Please sidetrack the argument by picking on minor details of an example I threw together quickly to illustrate a point. Please?

 

Hmm. Don't know. If this were a metaphysically powered martial artist, I would answer, "Perhaps by weakening his chi." You are free to use your imagination too, you know. I've never gone much for the, "Draining one power in an EC drains them all," anyway, although I guess it would depend on the circumstances.

 

Concept and Special Effects are what the game is about. That's why the system takes care of everything else.

 

The point is that it's far easier for a Human Torch character to justify a EC compared to a Batman type character. Why should the Human Torch save oodles of points on non-attack powers while Batman has to buy most of his non-attack powers straight?

 

You can argue that Batman could buy most of his powers with foci, but the fire character could easily buy his fire powers through a gem or powersuit as well.

 

Since I happen to think that Batman is as good of a conception as the Human Torch, I wouldn't give a cost break to one over the other.

[McCoy]

Originally posted by Gary

Since I happen to think that Batman is as good of a conception as the Human Torch, I wouldn't give a cost break to one over the other.

 

Is it? Personally, I've never seen a character sheet for Batman, or worse yet, Doc Savage, that I thought was satisfactory. How do you build these "no superpowers" characters with less than a thousand points?

[prestidigitator]

Originally posted by McCoy

Is it? Personally, I've never seen a character sheet for Batman, or worse yet, Doc Savage, that I thought was satisfactory. How do you build these "no superpowers" characters with less than a thousand points?

 

I would give him a VPP which at least has some kind of a Focus Limitation on all its Powers. I mean, come on: there isn't a single situation that comes up where Batman can't whip something out of his...er...utility belt, or his vehicle, to help him. If that isn't some kind of VPP, then I don't know what is. Come to think of it, how many gadgets have you seen Batman using at the same time? Maybe two or three? Everything else is just pure Dex, Int, Pre, Perks, Skills, and Skill Levels, baby!

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Gary

The problem with the conception argument for EC's is that it rewards certain conceptions over other conceptions. It gives a huge savings to energy projectors, and nothing to most martial artists.

 

Is anyone really going to argue that the Human Torch is a much better conception than Batman and deserves to save oodles of points?

 

Well, I'd argue he's a lot more limited.

[Rene]

Originally posted by Gary

Let's take a typical MA. He pays 10 pts for 20 str, pays 20 pts for a martial arts package, and 16 pts for +4 damage classes. That's 46 pts already, of which he pays straight most of the time. Assuming he uses offensive strike to get to 12d6, he needs to pay at least 4 more pts to cancel out the OCV penalties. That's 50 pts for a 12d6 attack with no range. That's not much if any, of a savings compared to an EB's multipower if you factor in the range that the EB has. And it's a lot easier to place limitations on the multipower to save points for the EB.

 

Now you're telling me that the EB can place his defenses and movements in an EC and save nearly 50% while the MA has to buy them straight?

 

But the point is, those 50 pts you expent don't get him just a 12d6 attack with no Range. Martial Artists have a lot of flexibility for comparatively few points. Those 50 pts are just the founding stone in a concept that requires few points to be obscenely efficient. The MA has other maneuvers without OCV penalties, he has a ridiculous Dodge, he has a obscene DEX score that is dirty cheap and probably the most cost-effective element in the entire game next to Overall Skill Levels, that probably he will have by the buttload too.

 

I doubt all this cost a lot more than 100 pts. And then the Energy Blaster will have to pay 120 pts for two 60-pt powers? Say, 12d6 straightforward EB and 30" Flight. The MA will kick his ass around the block in a few seconds, assuming he has at least one way to reach the Energy Blaster (like a OAF Batarang).

 

I'm all for getting rid of ECs, but first they should get around to make Characteristics and stuff like Overall Levels a little less underpriced.

 

And not to mention Bricks and their extraordinarly efficient STR, CON, PD and ED.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Rene

But the point is, those 50 pts you expent don't get him just a 12d6 attack with no Range. Martial Artists have a lot of flexibility for comparatively few points. Those 50 pts are just the founding stone in a concept that requires few points to be obscenely efficient. The MA has other maneuvers without OCV penalties, he has a ridiculous Dodge, he has a obscene DEX score that is dirty cheap and probably the most cost-effective element in the entire game next to Overall Skill Levels, that probably he will have by the buttload too.

 

Yeah, but the EB has the ability to add a whole new 60 pt power for the cost of 6 pts, less if he has limitations. This easily makes up for the bennies of MA maneuvers. And the EB has access to the same dirt cheap dex as well, while his dodge is only 2 pts worse. He pays the same price for overall levels as well, although I never found them to be that efficient.

 

Originally posted by Rene

I doubt all this cost a lot more than 100 pts. And then the Energy Blaster will have to pay 120 pts for two 60-pt powers? Say, 12d6 straightforward EB and 30" Flight. The MA will kick his ass around the block in a few seconds, assuming he has at least one way to reach the Energy Blaster (like a OAF Batarang).

 

Yeah, it costs 60 pts for 30" of flight because 30" of flight is a wonderful power. It gives a real advantage in and out of combat. How would the MA even come close to catching up to the EB if he doesn't spend a corresponding amount of points on his movement as well? And how many points is the MA going to spend on his batarangs? That's got to eat into any points savings he may already have.

 

Originally posted by Rene

I'm all for getting rid of ECs, but first they should get around to make Characteristics and stuff like Overall Levels a little less underpriced.

 

And not to mention Bricks and their extraordinarly efficient STR, CON, PD and ED.

 

Characteristics are underpriced, but EB's have the same access to them as MA's. Overall levels are not underpriced in my experience. 10 pts is a pretty hefty price.

[Rene]

Originally posted by Gary

Yeah, it costs 60 pts for 30" of flight because 30" of flight is a wonderful power. It gives a real advantage in and out of combat. How would the MA even come close to catching up to the EB if he doesn't spend a corresponding amount of points on his movement as well? And how many points is the MA going to spend on his batarangs? That's got to eat into any points savings he may already have.

 

Any power with OAF, Reduced by Strength, and possibly thrust into a Gadget Multipower or Gadget VPP will be dirty cheap too. I'm not saying MAs are injustly rewarded in the present system, to me this isn't a matter of a preference for a certain character concept. Nor I'm saying that Elemental Controls aren't mechanically nonsensical, maybe they are.

 

All I'm saying is that every character type in HERO has it's "cheat", some benefit more from one kind of cheat than from another. I'm not saying that EBs can't buy underpriced Chars. Only that, usually, Bricks and MAs have more free points to expend into underpriced Chars. If you get rid of ECs without changing the Chars, you tilt it more in favor of character types that still have their favored "cheat" in place.

 

Why don't make it a two-for-one sale? Let's get rid of everything that seems to give an injust edge, so everybody can be happy.

[Zed-F]

Originally posted by Rene

Why don't make it a two-for-one sale? Let's get rid of everything that seems to give an injust edge, so everybody can be happy.

 

Or unhappy, as the case may be.

[JmOz]

Originally posted by Gary

Let's take a typical MA. He pays 10 pts for 20 str, pays 20 pts for a martial arts package, and 16 pts for +4 damage classes. That's 46 pts already, of which he pays straight most of the time. Assuming he uses offensive strike to get to 12d6, he needs to pay at least 4 more pts to cancel out the OCV penalties. That's 50 pts for a 12d6 attack with no range. That's not much if any, of a savings compared to an EB's multipower if you factor in the range that the EB has. And it's a lot easier to place limitations on the multipower to save points for the EB.

 

Now you're telling me that the EB can place his defenses and movements in an EC and save nearly 50% while the MA has to buy them straight?

 

Let us look at your example in more deapth, aggreeing with your cost (and we will use the "Generic Martial Arts" as his package)

 

well, Str +10, that also gives him (IIRC) 11 points of savings (5 Stun, +2 PD, +4 Rec), so now his package only costs him 39 Points.

 

A No Range EB costs 40 points, and is a LOT less versitile

 

The Martial Artist now has the power to knock someone down everytime they hit (Martial Throw), get +2 to to Dodge (I'll be nice and call this 4 points). As said earlier the character does not NEED to use the Offensive strike, can use the Martial instead (10d6 in my games is considered a fair attack).

 

Put simply the MA is VERY cost effective.

 

The Brick is VERY cost effective (Especialy the Leaping Brick)

 

Gadgetteers are very effective thanks to the Foci rules

 

What do Blasters and mentalists get? Frame works

[JmOz]

Nasty thought however: Blasters can now be MA as well (Ranged MA's...NASTY)

[Gary]

Originally posted by JmOz

Let us look at your example in more deapth, aggreeing with your cost (and we will use the "Generic Martial Arts" as his package)

 

well, Str +10, that also gives him (IIRC) 11 points of savings (5 Stun, +2 PD, +4 Rec), so now his package only costs him 39 Points.

 

A No Range EB costs 40 points, and is a LOT less versitile

 

Yeah, but he can then start placing additional 60 pt powers into a multipower at the cost of 4 pts if he makes it no range as well. I would say that the versatility of a multipower compares quite favorably with the versatility of MA.

 

Originally posted by JmOz

The Martial Artist now has the power to knock someone down everytime they hit (Martial Throw), get +2 to to Dodge (I'll be nice and call this 4 points). As said earlier the character does not NEED to use the Offensive strike, can use the Martial instead (10d6 in my games is considered a fair attack).

 

And the EB has the power to hit everyone in an area, to blind them, to drain them, to suppress them, all at the dirt cheap price of a slot in a multipower.

 

Originally posted by JmOz

Put simply the MA is VERY cost effective.

 

The Brick is VERY cost effective (Especialy the Leaping Brick)

 

Gadgetteers are very effective thanks to the Foci rules

 

What do Blasters and mentalists get? Frame works

 

All they need is a multipower to compete. A EC is overkill.

[eepjr24]

Originally posted by Gary

All they need is a multipower to compete. A EC is overkill.

 

I think at this point, you are not arguing that they need something, only that EC is not it. You vary in degree, not in position, so to speak. It is very much an issue for each GM, and will depend alot on what they allow to go in an EC or MP or even VPP. I frown on VPP in general unless they have pre-written up everything, since I have had several players who would do the "Gimme 5 minutes and I'll have a write up for this thing I wanna do now". EC requires a decent concept and powers that fit together, but I allow 0 End. Usually, they have to fit well enough to be drained together, some exceptions exist. MP's I watch for the possible abuses there, and will usually require the "drain one, drain many" as a -0 limitation of SFX.

 

If not allowing EC's meets your needs, full speed ahead! But many people find that they work well and reward well thought out concepts, which are unfortunately rare in my neck of the woods.

 

- Ernie

[Ndreare]

I have been playing for a long time and have had hundreds if not thousands of battles using the fourth and fifth edition rules. From what I can see there is no problem with the way these two options are set up.

 

 

If the martial artist wants to have a “Martial Arts Maneuvers†Multipower he is allowed to and if the Blaster want to learn Kendo he is allowed to.

 

I my self have made martial arts characters with multipowers to complement their martial arts typically looking something like this.

 

20: Martial Arts Maneuvers; Multipower

4: 1m) +20 STR -1/2 no figs, -1/4 no lifting.

4: 2m) +4 DCV

4: 3m) +4 OCV in HTH

1: 4u) 1D6-1 HKA

 

 

This is just an example. There are cost breaks in the system I see that as an advantage not a flaw. As the GM I encourage players to have concepts and encourage them to have frameworks. All most all (90%) of the published villains do and realy I would like the players to have all the advantages the villains do.

 

Take a look at the villains from CKC and the characters from Champions even the martial artist (although I don’t like the champions martial artist) have frame works. So why are we talking about one being cheated over another when they all have the same options. If your concept includes throwing fire then throw fire If mine includes jump kicks you can bet your butt I will be doing jump kicks and be on even footing with your fire ball.

[Agent X]

Nothing wrong with ECs. There is no]/B] fundamental imbalance in this game. I don't care how many calculators you use. Experience in playability is the best teacher. I have played and seen played every character archetype and numerous twists on those archetypes. The system accomodates all archetypes. Where I've seen most campaigns get into trouble, where one archetype is favored over another, is when the GM has too many house rules or preferences that slants it one way or the other. If you are seeing an imbalance in your campaign you may need to reexamine the "style" of character construction that you and yours have.

 

I have a challenge for any of you who think ECs or Strength or whatever are inherently more efficient than anything else. Show me a character that you think is too efficient for other archetypes to deal with and I'll see (and others probably as well) if I can build a non-cheesy character who can deal with it. That should settle that. (Of course if this really resolved the question then that would knock about half the posts out of the Hero System Discussion Board;) ).

[Gary]

Originally posted by Agent X

I have a challenge for any of you who think ECs or Strength or whatever are inherently more efficient than anything else. Show me a character that you think is too efficient for other archetypes to deal with and I'll see (and others probably as well) if I can build a non-cheesy character who can deal with it. That should settle that. (Of course if this really resolved the question then that would knock about half the posts out of the Hero System Discussion Board;) ).

 

What are the ground rules? Any DC/CV/SPD limits? Any forbidden powers or attacks? Any house rules?

[JmOz]

Originally posted by Gary

Yeah, but he can then start placing additional 60 pt powers into a multipower at the cost of 4 pts if he makes it no range as well. I would say that the versatility of a multipower compares quite favorably with the versatility of MA.

 

 

 

And the EB has the power to hit everyone in an area, to blind them, to drain them, to suppress them, all at the dirt cheap price of a slot in a multipower.

 

 

 

All they need is a multipower to compete. A EC is overkill.

 

Agreed MP's CAN balance the field for some concepts, I call them the Swiss Army knife Characters.

 

However what about the "Basic Blaster" Who only has Flight, 1 EB, and FF, this character gets NO Benefits from a MP

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Gary

What are the ground rules? Any DC/CV/SPD limits? Any forbidden powers or attacks? Any house rules?

Just the cheesier you get, the cheesier I get.

[Zed-F]

Originally posted by JmOz

However what about the "Basic Blaster" Who only has Flight, 1 EB, and FF, this character gets NO Benefits from a MP

 

Such a character could benefit from an EC... though I personally would never use such a character, nor encourage any player playing one in a game I ran, except maybe in a Golden Age campaign. Waaaay too unidimensional.

[JmOz]

The point of "Blasic Blaster" up there is to illustrate that while the MP can help equal out some concepts with the more point effective Bricks and Martial Artists, others it does not help in the least. For that matter some concepts would actualy be hurt by a MP, these would be helped usually by an EC.

 

I agree that Basic Blaster up there might be to simplistic, but it is a generic Flying Blaster often seen in comics as the base of a character, and we will assume he has bought some skills to make the character interesting (Sometimes it is not about the powers after all)

[Gary]

Originally posted by JmOz

Agreed MP's CAN balance the field for some concepts, I call them the Swiss Army knife Characters.

 

However what about the "Basic Blaster" Who only has Flight, 1 EB, and FF, this character gets NO Benefits from a MP

 

Yeah, basic blasters would be screwed without EC's. IME though, almost nobody plays a basic blaster.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Agent X

Just the cheesier you get, the cheesier I get.

 

So you would be ok with building Cap America with NCM vs a Cap America without NCM to show the undercosting of str and dex?