Elemental Controls

[Hugh Neilson]

**sigh** Windmill - Don

Don - Windmill

 

Originally posted by Gary

I disagree, it’s fairly common from what I’ve seen that people with FF’s get stunned for con or knocked out, and are in battle with enemies who have area effects or explosions, or who want to make sure that an enemy stays unconscious.

 

For the extra regen you'll get before the battle ends (one way or another), it's not that big a difference. And I son;t see area effects commonly used in super vs super battles, simply because the advantage raises the AP/DC to a point whyere only guys with their fields down are vulnerable.

 

Assuming EC Man has a total 25 DEF, by the way, he must have 9 DEF outside the EC, which means that "take him out" shot needs to roll 19 BOD to put him in any mortal danger anyway.

 

The fact is, 2 BOD/turn regen is lots out of combat, and not enough to make a lot of difference in combat.

 

Originally posted by Gary

Ha ha ha. Roflmao. This is too funny. I would love to play in your campaign where buying a few inches of flight makes you immune to HTH attacks. You never had a MA, brick, or speedster in your campaign with flight, gliding, swinging, superleap, teleportation, vehicle, or have a teammate that could provide transport to the EB guy??? By not paying points for the DS, you’re conceding a major advantage to the EC guy and thus it’s an apples to oranges comparison.

 

Badger3k covered this one off fine. If I have a ranged attack, I attack you from range. If I'm a Brick, I throw a bus at you. If I'm a MA, my best approach may be to go jackrabbit - Martial Dodge, all levels to DCV and hunt cover. You can only do this for a limited time (whether because of your charges or because END runs out eventually). Or one of my teammates with a ranged attack gets to take you out.

 

That said, I have conceded an advantage to EC Guy. But it's not the huge advantage you seem to perceive. All I need is 5 points of flash defense to block it reliably, or 10 points to block it utterly. A non-sight targeting sense will do the job as well. The Damage Shield is a fluff power, not central to a character.

 

Originally posted by Gary

This is ridiculous. The GM has the right to disallow anything if it can't be justified. He can disallow EB or flight if he chooses. However, EB and flight don't have a specific caution by Steve against their usage, unlike extra dice of EB outside a MP which does have a specific caution against it.

 

OK, first off the RULE BOOK itself provides a power in a framework can't add to a power in another framework. That statement alone seems to imply that a power in a framework can add to a power outside. But we're not going to agree on that one, so let's just move MP Guy's balst entiurely in the MP (another 60 points, added to the 122 available if EC's aren't allowed) and have this MP:

 

120 Pool

 

13 +26/+26 ForceField 1/2 END

8 16" Flight 1/2 END

3 2 ptrs Regeneration

24 23d6 EB

11 11d6 Flash

3 15 Flash Def

 

182 POINT TOTAL

 

So, 40 points in Force Field (16/16, like you have) and 10 in Flight leave me 70 to use as I please. More flight, if I need more speed. More force field if I need more def. Regen if I'm injured for BOD (or concerned I might be). Flash DEF if need be. Or 14d6 EB (two dice more than EC Man has) to take you out. Or, if I think Flash will blind you, how about 12d6 EB + 2d6 Flash as a multiple power attack (legit since I have the AP to do it - not so with two attack powers in an EC).

 

Of course, I could tone down the EB max dice and take another attack power (maybe a ranged drain or a ranged transfer - those are generally fun). And I haven't even used the usual Ultra slots.

 

Take out those extra 40 (or 60 if EB in EC) points the EC would save, and I'll have to make much tougher choices. With the EC gone, though, Multi-Man's extra versatility forces him to make some hard choices in battling Ec Guy. That MP may look more like this:

 

80 Pool

 

13 +26/+26 ForceField 1/2 END

8 16" Flight 1/2 END

3 2 ptrs Regeneration

15 15d6 EB

3 15 Flash Def

 

122

 

I can still do pretty much anything EC Man can, but I had to sacrifice the extra attack (Flash) and I have to make some tough choices allocating between move, defense and attack. 40 points in Force Field means an 8d6 attack now. The Flash will be cheap enough to add with a few xp (a few dice at a time). But the reserve will take time to build up.

 

Originally posted by Gary

Ah, now we get to the subjective GM calls about what is allowed in a EC or not. Of course you would disagree with it, because you want to win the point.

 

I "would disagree" because you're stretching "light powers". Note, however, that for the purposes of comparison I accept the power's availability. If it has to be bought separately, MP Guy has another 8 points - woop woop!

 

Originally posted by Gary

And what about the fact that you absolutely refuse to make an apples to apples comparison?

 

I don't think I can read that statement one more time without referring to a different fruit (HINT: It's yellow!]

 

In any case, the whole point of MP vs EC is that EC permits an extra power to be acquired for 1/2 the cost of the "base pool power", but allows them all to be used at once. MP allows a new power for 1/5 or 1/10 the "base pool power", but you can't use them all at once. It seems the only "aples to apples" comparison that works for you is "exactly what the EC guy can do", which misses the point entirely. There are tradeoffs between the two frameworks. With the EC, EC and Multipower are pretty well balanced. Toast the EC, and Multipowers walk all over the poor guy left with no framework.

 

Tell me, have you actually RUN any games with the "no EC and no changes to Multipowers" approach, or is this all theoretical? I don't think I'm the only one who's been running for years with both frameworks (and, if anything, liberal EC's) and speaks from practical experience to say the EC does not provide an unbalanced advantage.

 

EDIT: GACK! Forgot to mention Batman! I won't try to compare him - if EC's and Multi's are apples and oranges, he's a turkey dinner with all the trimmings anyway. But he can add a gadget to his Utility Belt multi for 1-2 points. Gosh, I can use the xp I had in my first encounter with this new EC villain to add a device that will specifically be detrimental to him. No requirement to fit it to special effects - that's EC Man's problem. And look at the BatBooks - this is precisely how Bats approaches a problem. If he doesn't already have a gadget to deal with NewVillainMan, he finds one, or hge makes one! Meanwhile, EC Man with the same 2 XP, needs to fight Bats 9 more times to buy a new EC power to help him out. He'll be cooling his heels in BlackGate long before that!

[Farkling]

/QUOTE/

"Let's reason to effect shall we? I want to design a character with electrical powers who can fly, has a force field, a damage shield, and has a variety of electrical attacks. Hmmm, I know! I'll build a character that has an electrical elemental control with flight, force field, and a damage shield in it. For my attacks I'll buy a multipower with about 6 different slots."

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Alright...now tell me this Fibber McGee...why are your Defenses and Movements subject to mass electrical failure (Drain/Transfer) and your Energy Blasts aren't? Because of energy levels? Skill? Raw Power? Metagaming?

 

/QUOTE/

Now, I can have my movement, force field, and damage shield going just like in the comic books and I can still attack... just like in the comic books.

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Yes...just like your well experienced, well trained, highly established comic book heroes... ever read any comics involving origin stories or initial formations of teams? Yes, I MIGHT allow multiple frameworks if I was forming the Justice League...but not the X-Men. My players are all about growth of characters...so we start low. Probably a matter of personal taste...we wouldn't start a DnD game with 20th level characters, or a Mage game with Archmages. If we were going to start with well established heroes who needed multiple frameworks...we'd be playing a Galactic Legion of SuperHeroes style game. We aren't, and only one player had an interest in that...

 

/QUOTE/

"Honestly, your ban seems fairly arbitrary to me. I suppose you would make many published characters illegal in your game."

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Yep that's it...a BAN with no room for flexibility at all. Hugh will be the first to testify I am a close minded bastard.

 

A character who DID show up with multiple frameworks (Attack Mpower-Movement/Defense EC) all stemming from the SAME special effects would have the -0 limit stacked on for "drained as EC"... now, if that same character shows with an EC giving inherent powers and offensive powers from a source OTHER than the same EC effects, we might work it out.

 

As has been stated previously...in case you missed it...I DON'T buy the Universe supplements (in part) BECAUSE they use those constructs, and because the universe is lightly corny to my gaming group. Guess that means we are closer to high powered Dark Champions in your book.

 

I do however have an interest in the Agency books...those are always useful. When does GENOCIDE come out? I am updapting PSI to use in both the SPies and Supers game.

[Farkling]

And for the record...the EC - Light Powers with Regeneration in the EC ?? No. Power Transfer - Yes. Drain linked Aid - Yes. Drain linked Healing - Yes. Absorbtion - Yes. Desolid linked Regeneration in one slot - Maybe.

Flat purchase? I don't think so, since the offhand explanation seems to imply that you ARE Desolid, and possibly immobile.

 

But that's just in my game. Your GM may have a different view of PsuedoScience than I do.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Farkling

/QUOTE/

"Let's reason to effect shall we? I want to design a character with electrical powers who can fly, has a force field, a damage shield, and has a variety of electrical attacks. Hmmm, I know! I'll build a character that has an electrical elemental control with flight, force field, and a damage shield in it. For my attacks I'll buy a multipower with about 6 different slots."

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Alright...now tell me this Fibber McGee...why are your Defenses and Movements subject to mass electrical failure (Drain/Transfer) and your Energy Blasts aren't? Because of energy levels? Skill? Raw Power? Metagaming?

 

/QUOTE/

Now, I can have my movement, force field, and damage shield going just like in the comic books and I can still attack... just like in the comic books.

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Yes...just like your well experienced, well trained, highly established comic book heroes... ever read any comics involving origin stories or initial formations of teams? Yes, I MIGHT allow multiple frameworks if I was forming the Justice League...but not the X-Men. My players are all about growth of characters...so we start low. Probably a matter of personal taste...we wouldn't start a DnD game with 20th level characters, or a Mage game with Archmages. If we were going to start with well established heroes who needed multiple frameworks...we'd be playing a Galactic Legion of SuperHeroes style game. We aren't, and only one player had an interest in that...

 

/QUOTE/

"Honestly, your ban seems fairly arbitrary to me. I suppose you would make many published characters illegal in your game."

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Yep that's it...a BAN with no room for flexibility at all. Hugh will be the first to testify I am a close minded bastard.

 

A character who DID show up with multiple frameworks (Attack Mpower-Movement/Defense EC) all stemming from the SAME special effects would have the -0 limit stacked on for "drained as EC"... now, if that same character shows with an EC giving inherent powers and offensive powers from a source OTHER than the same EC effects, we might work it out.

 

As has been stated previously...in case you missed it...I DON'T buy the Universe supplements (in part) BECAUSE they use those constructs, and because the universe is lightly corny to my gaming group. Guess that means we are closer to high powered Dark Champions in your book.

 

I do however have an interest in the Agency books...those are always useful. When does GENOCIDE come out? I am updapting PSI to use in both the SPies and Supers game.

Hey, if that's the way you guys like to play that's fine. You posted your rationale and I absolutely disagree with it. BTW, when people bring up the X-Men to justify a certain view of character construction they necessarily are leaving a few characters out.

 

Personally, I like to play Champions in a way that encourages new players to walk right in and feel comfortable that they know how to build characters and play the game. And I do use the characters in the published materials as a guide for how to use frameworks, etc. If you think that's Cheesy... well, it sounds like a personal problem to me.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Agent X

Hey, if that's the way you guys like to play that's fine. You posted your rationale and I absolutely disagree with it. BTW, when people bring up the X-Men to justify a certain view of character construction they necessarily are leaving a few characters out.

 

It depends on which vewrsion of X-Men you want to address. When a new "mutant super group" is gathered from previous unknowns, generally recently active mutants, they do tend to be characters who haven't been fleshed out. I think the original 5 could all have been put together with no more than one framework apiece. The New X-Men (GS #1) could have been build similarly.

 

Do some have multiple frameworks now? Maybe. If they grew up in Farkling's campaign, maybe they expanded on their existing framework, or bought some powers independent of the framework, and just have a lot more xp than they would have in your campaign or mine, where they would have multiple frameworks. You CAN build them without frameworks. They just aren't as point-efficient.

 

Some "new" mutants (eg Bishop, Gambit) show up with lots more power than a "starting X-Man", but these guys have been around for a while (ie not "beginning characters" in terms of xp). They've earned their xp in another campaign, and aren't known to the present characters until, fully formed, they show up.

 

Originally posted by Agent X

Personally, I like to play Champions in a way that encourages new players to walk right in and feel comfortable that they know how to build characters and play the game. And I do use the characters in the published materials as a guide for how to use frameworks, etc. If you think that's Cheesy... well, it sounds like a personal problem to me.

 

On the one hand, I agree that play by the book makes it easier for new players and that's one of my biggest reasons for it. On the other hand, only one player in my group over the past 10+ years read the rules and knew the basics before starting with the group, so we could have made up pretty much any rules we wanted. On the third hand (Extra limbs - Gaming Only ) pretty much every campaign has "house rules", major or minor. Even "oh, we allow 'no END' powers in EC's", or which AP/DC/DEF caps we enforce, or how critical it is to have some flash defense or a targetting sense that's not sight-based. Things that experienced players still need to root out. Of course, the less deviation from the norm, the easier it is for them.

 

Finally, I don't think Farkling's ever claimed his approach is anything but personal preference. He's certainly acknowledged numerous times that it's not the way the system creators use the frameworks. Certainly, he's never claimed that we softies who allow multiple frameworks aren't playing by the rules, just not by HIS rules.

 

And just for the record, no, I don't allow frameworks as slots in frameworks, Farkling And that IS an outright ban (Ok, no one's ever tried to persuade me, but still...) Say, out of curiosity, where do you stand on the "power in a framework boosting a power outside the framework" debate?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Farkling

And for the record...the EC - Light Powers with Regeneration in the EC ?? No. Power Transfer - Yes. Drain linked Aid - Yes. Drain linked Healing - Yes. Absorbtion - Yes. Desolid linked Regeneration in one slot - Maybe.

Flat purchase? I don't think so, since the offhand explanation seems to imply that you ARE Desolid, and possibly immobile.

 

But that's just in my game. Your GM may have a different view of PsuedoScience than I do.

 

The other possibility I see from the comments are "my body is solid light so wounds heal faster". That doesn't sound so much light-based as altered body-based to me, and allowing that opens the door to "Android Body" EC's and pretty soon anyone can have an EC with half a dozen unrelated powers - "EC: Mutant Powers" (or Alien Powers, or Supernatural Powers, or "Batman's Abilities Powers", or "Apples and Oranges Powers" etc. [you guys keep forgetting the mandatory references in this thread - they're a thread rule, you know ).

[Gary]

Originally posted by badger3k

The regeneration takes 1 turn to get 1 BODY. I've never been in a situation where 1 BODY per turn had a serious effect on combat. And unless I read the rules wrong, both the powers in EC and MP would go out when the character is stunned or KO'd - the exception being the Regeneration, which is specifically bought as persistant. Anyone's FF goes down, they're pretty much a target of opportunity IMO. Unless both have big defenses, the regenerate body doesn't do much for negative stun.

 

Regen is like an insurance policy. It doesn't come into play a whole lot but when it does, you're really glad you bought it. Persistent regen is a lot better than nonpersistent regen.

 

 

 

Originally posted by badger3k

I may be wrong, but if a character attacks EC man, gets blinded, then maybe the brick grabs a car or telephone pole, the speedster grabs the metal frisbee he uses as an EB, the marksman gets his rifle out. I think I've only seen one character in the games I've played in who had no ranged attack. I think his point was that flying characters tend to get attacked by ranged attacks. The flash damage shield may be a neat one-use or limited use power, but since its obviously visible, it isn't that effective as a defensive countermeasure once word gets around. It can help as an offensive weapon, perhaps in a move-by or through, but in that caase why not by a regular flash attack. That limits is usefulness tremendously, IMO.

 

I checked CKC. About 1 in 5 characters have no ranged attacks, and a few have either wimpy ranged attacks or like Scorpia have a powerful ranged attack that can't be used against someone with a force field. Having a power that discourages 1 in 5 characters from using their most powerful attack on you is pretty good in my book. And there are limits to brick's using cars and trucks as free area effects. These are usually social or GM imposed limits since otherwise there would be nothing to prevent a brick from lugging a vault door with him all the time. If bricks use objects as free area effects too often, they should be made to buy the area effect advantage on their strength with OIF object of opportunity.

 

 

 

Originally posted by badger3k

Isn't this whole thread pretty subjective?

 

I made the EC and an MP the same way as in the example. With the same points, I made a 58 pt multipower pool for the same powers (8 point multi-slots). For better use, I put the regen and flash in ultra slots (4 each), and got another 8 point slot (8d6 EB) - now MP doesn't have to let them come to him - he can take the fight to the enemy. As to who is more powerful that's completely subjective. If both characters slug it out, with no tactics, then the EC probably will win. If their is some flexibility, the odds are probably still in the favor of EC guy (since he can use all powers at full power). If you go with both characters going after a villain, then its more open, especially if you modify the MP as I did.

 

We've rarely used ECs since they were always pretty restricted, and cost too much. MPs offered ease of expansion and use. Sure, the characters were not as powerful as the comic book heroes (like the oft-cited human torch example), but for a few points they can improve their power suite. ECs, as have been noted, can't do that. EC man still needs 20 CP to add a power (adjusted down in RP, of course). MP man needs 4 or 8 for full power. 8 points buys 40 active, opposed to 20 points for 40 active. The MP cost can also have limitations on it to lower the real cost as well (didn't want to imply it couldn't be done).

 

To me its imposible to accurately 'prove' that one is better than the other - each one has benefits in certain situations. If you look at an EC and MP constructed in exactly the same way, the MP costs less, but the EC can do more at once. That's what its designed to do. Try to make an EC as flexible as an MP, for the same cost - can't be done to my knowledge.

 

Trying to prove that just seems to be comparing batman to oranges (sorry - had to keep batman and fruits together in the thread somehow)

 

I'll answer the rest of your post along with Hugh's since I don't want to cover the same ground twice.

[Gary]

Originally posted by zornwil

I don't think that's true, because for encounters villains/situations are geared to challenge players in a "realistic" way. That being said, I'm not so likely to create a villain who can stop a wide variety of MP powers (except at their root, and with MPs there's no enforced linkage as the same degree as with ECs) as I am a villain who will stop "the element" that is obvious to the character. The reason that the villain isn't as likely to stop an entire MP is that "realism" in the campaign; I can't afford to suspend disbelief to the point where a villain has a counter for everything in an MP. If the MP conveniently rests on a focus (yes, many do) it's a good bit simpler. But I find most players are unwilling to do so. And your classic Batman has an MP of "gadgets" that usually is not solely dependent on his utility belt.

 

Just how many villains are capable of stopping the player's special effects? In the majority of encounters, the big dice attack is better than the small dice multipower. In some encounters, the small dice multipower is much better than the big dice attack. You see characters in the book with 1 power attacks such as Cyclops all the time, but villains rarely find a way to specifically neutralize that single power.

 

Originally posted by zornwil

Typically, I see MPs that are harder to scatter at once, whereas ECs are always pretty obvious in their effects. I would say that's been true well before 5th edition.

 

As an aside, as to your comments about the "changes" in 5th, the only one I can see that really matters is the 0 END one. That does address some of your concern. As to the drain-one-drain-all "addition", I don't know of a person who didn't play it such that a reasonable drain didn't drain the EC, and I don't know of a reasonable person who is playing it in practice identically to what 5th says on that point UNLESS they're (and this is reasonable) ensuring that any drains are well-defined enough in SFX that in practice it always works out.

 

Yeah, the no 0 end powers in a EC really helps. In the bad old days, people would routinely put armor and damage reduction in the EC.

 

I see the drain one drain all aspect as being fundamental to the nature of a EC. If you don't want any drain to zap your FF at the same time as your flight, then maybe you shouldn't have accepted all those point savings, or accepted a lesser savings.

[Gary]

Originally posted by zornwil

Just to chime in from real world experience - "most" (actually the vast majority if I look through sheest) players I've seen will take the versatility over the big attack any day. And "most' players I've seen don't put a big attack in an EC and smaller attacks in an MP, although I've seen this on occassion certainly.

 

What player's tend to choose is a completely different subject than the "value" of a power. For example, most players would tend to choose a 12d6 natural attack as opposed to a 18d6 OIF attack, but the "values" are equivalent.

 

I would say that a single 90 pt attack is roughly in the same ballpark in terms of "value" to a 5 slot 60 pt multipower.

[Gary]

Originally posted by zornwil

Well, in my game a brick can't do anything with 10 points of Martial Arts just because I do something similar to the earliest editions in that MA is essentially an advantage on STR (long story and a tangent to this thread, I've posted it elsewhere in more detail and you've probably seen it). So I will thoroughly admit I can't relate on this one. But as one of my players pointed out, you can just buy skill levels for the brick anyway and it's just about as cheap. Skill levels do that for just about anybody.

 

I dont' disagree that the MP/VPP with EC is an efficient design. But to AgentX' point, while the characters you've seen are more "efficient", were they really measurably more effective in game play?

 

Now that's a loaded question - if you're like me as a GM, you strive to ensure there's some equivalency in point of play. So I understand that and it's not intended to back you into any corner. I welcome any comments you have that say "no, but here's what I had to do as GM to "correct" it"

 

It wasn't really a problem because of point caps, and the fact that everybody built the same way. The odd few characters that didn't build that way were either unique wonderful designs, or simply had fewer points to spend on skills and thus were less effective in non-combat. However, a certain level of GM favoritism was still needed so that the newer players who weren't as good at designing characters, still had a reasonable amount of airtime.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

**sigh** Windmill - Don

Don - Windmill

 

You're a pretty persistent windmill aren't you?

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

For the extra regen you'll get before the battle ends (one way or another), it's not that big a difference. And I son;t see area effects commonly used in super vs super battles, simply because the advantage raises the AP/DC to a point whyere only guys with their fields down are vulnerable.

 

Assuming EC Man has a total 25 DEF, by the way, he must have 9 DEF outside the EC, which means that "take him out" shot needs to roll 19 BOD to put him in any mortal danger anyway.

 

The fact is, 2 BOD/turn regen is lots out of combat, and not enough to make a lot of difference in combat.

 

Have you ever heard of killing attacks? Those extra 9 Ded usually aren't resistant. And it's reasonable to throw out 3d6 killing explosions in the hopes of getting a good stun multiple. I suppose I can also change the regen to 1 body with resurrection. Needless to say, that's something that the multipower can't match.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Badger3k covered this one off fine. If I have a ranged attack, I attack you from range. If I'm a Brick, I throw a bus at you. If I'm a MA, my best approach may be to go jackrabbit - Martial Dodge, all levels to DCV and hunt cover. You can only do this for a limited time (whether because of your charges or because END runs out eventually). Or one of my teammates with a ranged attack gets to take you out.

 

That said, I have conceded an advantage to EC Guy. But it's not the huge advantage you seem to perceive. All I need is 5 points of flash defense to block it reliably, or 10 points to block it utterly. A non-sight targeting sense will do the job as well. The Damage Shield is a fluff power, not central to a character.

 

I covered this with badger, but let's change the EC example to something with a clear defensive edge. How about invisibility?

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

OK, first off the RULE BOOK itself provides a power in a framework can't add to a power in another framework. That statement alone seems to imply that a power in a framework can add to a power outside.

 

That's because powers outside can add to a power inside, but they have to be different powers. Such as 2d6 flash adding to a EB inside the MP. The Q&A makes it clear that this was the intent.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

But we're not going to agree on that one, so let's just move MP Guy's balst entiurely in the MP (another 60 points, added to the 122 available if EC's aren't allowed) and have this MP:

 

120 Pool

 

13 +26/+26 ForceField 1/2 END

8 16" Flight 1/2 END

3 2 ptrs Regeneration

24 23d6 EB

11 11d6 Flash

3 15 Flash Def

 

182 POINT TOTAL

 

So, 40 points in Force Field (16/16, like you have) and 10 in Flight leave me 70 to use as I please. More flight, if I need more speed. More force field if I need more def. Regen if I'm injured for BOD (or concerned I might be). Flash DEF if need be. Or 14d6 EB (two dice more than EC Man has) to take you out. Or, if I think Flash will blind you, how about 12d6 EB + 2d6 Flash as a multiple power attack (legit since I have the AP to do it - not so with two attack powers in an EC).

 

Yeah for 182 pts, you have a structure where you can only have 8d6 attacks and still match my flight and FF. You're also not matching my damage shield (or invisibility) and have a lesser form of regeneration. The only way you have a 2 DC advantage over me is if you lower your flight to a grand total of 4". And you're busting any point caps that might ever exist in your campaign. Congratulations, you've merely made your MP competitive with the Straight Power Dude, with a framework that you yourself would never allow in your campaign, and which doesn't match all the powers of the SPD.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Of course, I could tone down the EB max dice and take another attack power (maybe a ranged drain or a ranged transfer - those are generally fun). And I haven't even used the usual Ultra slots.

 

Take out those extra 40 (or 60 if EB in EC) points the EC would save, and I'll have to make much tougher choices. With the EC gone, though, Multi-Man's extra versatility forces him to make some hard choices in battling Ec Guy. That MP may look more like this:

 

80 Pool

 

13 +26/+26 ForceField 1/2 END

8 16" Flight 1/2 END

3 2 ptrs Regeneration

15 15d6 EB

3 15 Flash Def

 

122

 

I can still do pretty much anything EC Man can, but I had to sacrifice the extra attack (Flash) and I have to make some tough choices allocating between move, defense and attack. 40 points in Force Field means an 8d6 attack now. The Flash will be cheap enough to add with a few xp (a few dice at a time). But the reserve will take time to build up.

 

Let's change your example so that you add in invisibility, since we can't seem to agree on the value of the damage shield. You also get 6 more points to play with since that is the difference in cost.

 

80 Pool

 

13 +26/+26 ForceField 1/2 END

8 16" Flight 1/2 END

3 2 ptrs Regeneration

15 15d6 EB

1 5 Flash Def

8 Invisibility 40 pts worth

 

128

 

I don't see how you can say that this structure is competitive with EC Dude with 16/16 FF, 16" flight, invisibility, and persistent regen as well as a 12d6 attack.

 

To match my attack, you have a grand total of 20 pts to play with. You can have 8/8 FF, 8" flight, or 4" flight and 4/4 FF. If you want to match the FF and have even 4" of flight, you have a grand total of 6d6 attack. Woohoo. You're not even the slightest bit competitive. You can't even do something as basic as be invisible and attack with full dice at the same time, let alone have any protection or flight. EC guy will wipe the floor with you. I can't possibly see how you can confidently declare that your MP guy can handle the EC guy with his 68 pts extra savings. I can fly, be protected, be invisible, attack at full power, and have persistent regen all at the same time. You can have at most 2 of these, and less if you want to attack.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I "would disagree" because you're stretching "light powers". Note, however, that for the purposes of comparison I accept the power's availability. If it has to be bought separately, MP Guy has another 8 points - woop woop!

 

There is an actual Champions character with coalescing electricity as the basis for his regen. I don't remember the character's name, but he was electric based.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I don't think I can read that statement one more time without referring to a different fruit (HINT: It's yellow!]

 

In any case, the whole point of MP vs EC is that EC permits an extra power to be acquired for 1/2 the cost of the "base pool power", but allows them all to be used at once. MP allows a new power for 1/5 or 1/10 the "base pool power", but you can't use them all at once. It seems the only "aples to apples" comparison that works for you is "exactly what the EC guy can do", which misses the point entirely. There are tradeoffs between the two frameworks. With the EC, EC and Multipower are pretty well balanced. Toast the EC, and Multipowers walk all over the poor guy left with no framework.

 

As the above examples prove, the EC guy will walk all over the MP guy. If you get rid of the EC bonus, they'll be competitive.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Tell me, have you actually RUN any games with the "no EC and no changes to Multipowers" approach, or is this all theoretical? I don't think I'm the only one who's been running for years with both frameworks (and, if anything, liberal EC's) and speaks from practical experience to say the EC does not provide an unbalanced advantage.

 

I've always ran with EC's before. If I start a new campaign, I will replace them with a -1/4 or -1/2 drain one drain all limitation for those who want a point savings. In my experience, most people either have a EC, are characteristic based, or both. Nobody I know of has ever gone the big multipower with flexible slots.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

EDIT: GACK! Forgot to mention Batman! I won't try to compare him - if EC's and Multi's are apples and oranges, he's a turkey dinner with all the trimmings anyway. But he can add a gadget to his Utility Belt multi for 1-2 points. Gosh, I can use the xp I had in my first encounter with this new EC villain to add a device that will specifically be detrimental to him. No requirement to fit it to special effects - that's EC Man's problem. And look at the BatBooks - this is precisely how Bats approaches a problem. If he doesn't already have a gadget to deal with NewVillainMan, he finds one, or hge makes one! Meanwhile, EC Man with the same 2 XP, needs to fight Bats 9 more times to buy a new EC power to help him out. He'll be cooling his heels in BlackGate long before that!

 

You're picking a bad example. Bats has his multipower through foci. That means that zapping a single power zaps the entire MP at the same time. And with the power level of his gadgets, he probably only has 8 def non-hardened for his utility belt. He is highly vulnerable in ways that the EC dude isn't.

[Farkling]

/QUOTE/

" Say, out of curiosity, where do you stand on the "power in a framework boosting a power outside the framework" debate?"

/ENDQUOTE

 

It's allowed by the rules...though the implication is it should be a different power. I would allow the Pulsar construct up to a certain level of additional dice...probably even over the active point cap. No linked limitation, and only working in conjunction WITH that slot. The limitation on the dice MAKES it a different power by definition. The feel would only be right if it the outside power is "smaller" than the slot.

 

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Agent X

Hey, if that's the way you guys like to play that's fine. You posted your rationale and I absolutely disagree with it. BTW, when people bring up the X-Men to justify a certain view of character construction they necessarily are leaving a few characters out.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Which characters? Speak up...let's see the examples. You are not allowed to use any characters created by Rob Liefeld as your source material. They pretty much ARE all designed with multiple frameworks, and probably even frameworks within frameworks if we analyzed them.

 

/QUOTE/

" You see characters in the book with 1 power attacks such as Cyclops all the time"

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Anyone who doesn't believe Cyclops has a Multipower hasn't seen a lot of him in the comics. Of course, I have heard that they changed the flexibility of his powers in recent years...

 

I prefer purchasing gmaes and Hero books to comix...I can't budget both.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

What player's tend to choose is a completely different subject than the "value" of a power. For example, most players would tend to choose a 12d6 natural attack as opposed to a 18d6 OIF attack, but the "values" are equivalent.

 

I would say that a single 90 pt attack is roughly in the same ballpark in terms of "value" to a 5 slot 60 pt multipower.

 

????Above these posts you say the 18d6 EB wins pretty much all the time. Here it's equivalent. Which is it?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

Have you ever heard of killing attacks? Those extra 9 Ded usually aren't resistant. And it's reasonable to throw out 3d6 killing explosions in the hopes of getting a good stun multiple. I suppose I can also change the regen to 1 body with resurrection. Needless to say, that's something that the multipower can't match.

 

Perhaps I'm more "four color" than you, but I don't see a lot of guys tossing around killing explosions. Oh, and there's NO WAY I'm classifying "resurrection" as a light based power.

 

Your comments to Badger were dead on, by the way. Regen is something desired once in a while. So you turn it on when you need it and use the points for other purposes the rest of the time.

 

Originally posted by Gary

I covered this with badger, but let's change the EC example to something with a clear defensive edge. How about invisibility?

 

OK, let's use invisibilty. EC Guy is invisible. I shoot at his force field, which is not invisible (you need IPE for that). Or I'll shoot at his regen, which is also not invisible (it's persistent, remember - and it's based on a power that costs END, so it's visible). Let's leave those worms in the can and I'll just fire on the force field. Or you can hope no one has an AE attack and leave the Field off...but you aren't getting the benefit of both at the same time then, are you?

 

Originally posted by Gary

Yeah for 182 pts, you have a structure where you can only have 8d6 attacks and still match my flight and FF. You're also not matching my damage shield (or invisibility) and have a lesser form of regeneration. The only way you have a 2 DC advantage over me is if you lower your flight to a grand total of 4". And you're busting any point caps that might ever exist in your campaign. Congratulations, you've merely made your MP competitive with the Straight Power Dude, with a framework that you yourself would never allow in your campaign, and which doesn't match all the powers of the SPD.

 

I have choices you do not. On Ph 11, 1 DEX, land, lower the Field to 7/7 (18 AP) and fire a 20d6 EB. In ph 12, I'll abort to reactivate my force field - at 26/26. Of course, this will work ONCE, since you'll reserve after that. But that's fine - I'll get the first shot since you don't dare stop reserving. And I still have that 2d6 advantage if I don't worry about moving quickly. I can use Flash and blind you next time.

 

In a straight up fight, you can use all your powers at full, and I can't. In some cases, that will be advantageous - I can't chase you, fire full power EB's and keep my force field up at the same time (or be invisible inside my force field - big deal).

 

But I do have the advantage in versatility. It's slight if we have EC's and Multi's. It's substantive if EC's get no point break.

 

By the way, what is your 40 points invis. I'm not prone to allow anything but Sight as you have Light powers. Oh, and I don'tr want invisibility sonce my force field remains visible, remember? I'll put my 6 points in the Multi Pool and get another d6 on you, or another 2/2 force field, or a bit more flight - whatever I want, since multipowers are more flexible.

 

Originally posted by Gary

There is an actual Champions character with coalescing electricity as the basis for his regen. I don't remember the character's name, but he was electric based.

 

I wouldn't allow that in an EC either. I would allow the power, but I don't buy the close connection to his SFX. That connection requirement has gotten tighter as the editions have risen.

 

Originally posted by Gary

I've always ran with EC's before. If I start a new campaign, I will replace them with a -1/4 or -1/2 drain one drain all limitation for those who want a point savings. In my experience, most people either have a EC, are characteristic based, or both. Nobody I know of has ever gone the big multipower with flexible slots.

 

I don't see a lot of "big multi" characters either, actually. More commonly Attack Multi/other powers bought otherwise. I can see an advantage to flexibility, however. It all depends how you design the character as a whole.

 

hmmm...-1/2 to ALL my powers and they don't all have to be the same point total. That could be even more effective than an EC in the right situation. But let's leave that - it all depends on the character.

 

As to the point of the question, then you've never actually run the other way to see how it works, and speak with no experience how the change would affect the game. Thanks for clarifying that.

 

Originally posted by Gary

You're picking a bad example. Bats has his multipower through foci. That means that zapping a single power zaps the entire MP at the same time. And with the power level of his gadgets, he probably only has 8 def non-hardened for his utility belt. He is highly vulnerable in ways that the EC dude isn't.

 

Actually, I see Bat's Utility Belt being a lot like the "OAF Guns" multipower - OAF slots and OIF Belt. The belt is almost never removed, and has generally been shown to have some security measures. So trash a gadget and he's down a gadget - he still has the belt. Let's look at the character as the comics portray him, not as you may think he would mechanically be written up.

 

At higher levels, I think Bat's belt may well be a VPP rather than a multipower. "What a coincidence - the Bat-Pineapple Juicer is just the right gadget for the situation."

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

????Above these posts you say the 18d6 EB wins pretty much all the time. Here it's equivalent. Which is it?

 

Here's what I actually said:

 

Second of all, your price structure is completely out of whack. 240 pts would give you either a 48d6 EB or a 32d6 EB at 0 end which is far superior to 5 separate 60 pt attacks. Therefore the value of 5 separate attacks is worth less than 240 pts. At 90 pts, you can get a 18d6 EB which is roughly as valuable as the choice of a 12d6 eb, 4d6 rka, 8d6 explosion EB, 12d6 flash, or 6d6 entangle. At least the value of the 18d6 eb is in the same ballpark with the multipower, unlike the 48d6 or 32d6 0 end.

 

and

 

Yeah, it's hard to quantify the value of versatility, but in the majority of encounters, 18d6 is better than the multipower. You'll get a situation where 75% of the time, the single power is better and 25% of the time, the multipower is a lot better. That seems to be a fair tradeoff in my book.

 

and

 

Hooboy, are you actually denying that the 90 point power would be more useful most of the time? A 12d6 EB does 17 pts of stun, 5" knockback (which would average 0 damage on a solid hit), and has a 13.76% chance of stunning the average 25 def 23 con target. The 18d6 EB does 38 stun, 11" knockback (which would do 13.5 more stun on a solid hit), and has a 97.77% chance of stunning the same 25 def 23 con target. The values are equivalent since the 18d6 has an advantage most of the time, but some of the time he's totally screwed. Just like a guy with 18d6 bought through an OIF has the advantage most of the time over a 12d6 natural EB, but would be screwed part of the time when his focus is taken away. This is basic stuff here, not rocket science.

 

It would be nice if you did me the courtesy of actually reading my posts.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Perhaps I'm more "four color" than you, but I don't see a lot of guys tossing around killing explosions. Oh, and there's NO WAY I'm classifying "resurrection" as a light based power.

 

Your comments to Badger were dead on, by the way. Regen is something desired once in a while. So you turn it on when you need it and use the points for other purposes the rest of the time.

 

 

 

OK, let's use invisibilty. EC Guy is invisible. I shoot at his force field, which is not invisible (you need IPE for that). Or I'll shoot at his regen, which is also not invisible (it's persistent, remember - and it's based on a power that costs END, so it's visible). Let's leave those worms in the can and I'll just fire on the force field. Or you can hope no one has an AE attack and leave the Field off...but you aren't getting the benefit of both at the same time then, are you?

 

You're absolutely right! I've been playing for years that invisibility would cover stuff like force fields and flight. I note that 5th edition specifically states that it doesn't, unlike 4th edition. This seems kinda stupid though. Since running isn't invisible, that means that invisibility is worthless to anybody who ever moves.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I have choices you do not. On Ph 11, 1 DEX, land, lower the Field to 7/7 (18 AP) and fire a 20d6 EB. In ph 12, I'll abort to reactivate my force field - at 26/26. Of course, this will work ONCE, since you'll reserve after that. But that's fine - I'll get the first shot since you don't dare stop reserving. And I still have that 2d6 advantage if I don't worry about moving quickly. I can use Flash and blind you next time.

 

In a straight up fight, you can use all your powers at full, and I can't. In some cases, that will be advantageous - I can't chase you, fire full power EB's and keep my force field up at the same time (or be invisible inside my force field - big deal).

 

But I do have the advantage in versatility. It's slight if we have EC's and Multi's. It's substantive if EC's get no point break.

 

By the way, what is your 40 points invis. I'm not prone to allow anything but Sight as you have Light powers. Oh, and I don'tr want invisibility sonce my force field remains visible, remember? I'll put my 6 points in the Multi Pool and get another d6 on you, or another 2/2 force field, or a bit more flight - whatever I want, since multipowers are more flexible.

 

I could replace the slot with +8 DCV costs end (Vibron page 214 of CKC), but since there seems to be so much argument about it and regeneration, let's make a simpler EC.

 

20 EC

20 16/16 FF 1/2 end

20 16" flight 1/2 end

40 12d6 EB.

 

That is 100 pts or 140 if bought straight.

 

Now if I understand you correctly, your 100 pt multipower would be roughly:

 

70 Pool

 

8 16/16 ForceField 1/2 END

8 16" Flight 1/2 END

14 14d6 EB

 

100

 

Are you going to seriously argue that this multipower is competitive with the EC??? The EC can have everything going at once, while if you have a 12d6 attack, you would have a grand total of 10 pts available for defenses and movements. Or if you have max defense, you'll have 30 pts available which means 6d6 EB even if you don't move at all. The EC is clearly and obviously far superior to this construct, so much so that I wonder why you would even argue the point.

 

Now if you have 140 pts to play with, it's a different story:

 

100 Pool

 

13 +26/+26 ForceField 1/2 END

8 16" Flight 1/2 END

19 19d6 EB

 

140 POINT TOTAL

 

This is competitive with the guy who buys everything straight. It's not obviously superior, but it's not obviously inferior either. You have 100 pts to play with vs 140 for Straight Dude, but you have flexibility, although you're still probably exceeding damage caps.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I wouldn't allow that in an EC either. I would allow the power, but I don't buy the close connection to his SFX. That connection requirement has gotten tighter as the editions have risen.

 

Possible. I don't see the need to argue this point since it's a judgement call.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

I don't see a lot of "big multi" characters either, actually. More commonly Attack Multi/other powers bought otherwise. I can see an advantage to flexibility, however. It all depends how you design the character as a whole.

 

In practice, EC's with attack MPs work better.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

hmmm...-1/2 to ALL my powers and they don't all have to be the same point total. That could be even more effective than an EC in the right situation. But let's leave that - it all depends on the character.

 

-1/2 would only be if there are lots of powers/active points involved. I would have to make a judgement call about how many powers/points would be the threshold. -1/4 would be far more likely. Incidentally, the EC saves lots more points if there are already existing limitations than my method even at -1/2. For example with a 40 pt EC and -1/2 of existing limitations:

 

13 EC -1/2 limit on total EC

13 flight

13 FF

13 EB

 

52 pts. Whereas if it's an additional -1/2 limitation, it becomes:

 

(Framework with -1/2 framework limitation and -1/2 outside limitation)

20 flight

20 FF

20 EB

 

Total 60 pts. Making an explicit limitation counters the "double dipping" effect of limitations on EC's.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

As to the point of the question, then you've never actually run the other way to see how it works, and speak with no experience how the change would affect the game. Thanks for clarifying that.

 

I have years of seeing many EC's in action. I see it as simply free points for a structure that really doesn't limit you.

 

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Actually, I see Bat's Utility Belt being a lot like the "OAF Guns" multipower - OAF slots and OIF Belt. The belt is almost never removed, and has generally been shown to have some security measures. So trash a gadget and he's down a gadget - he still has the belt. Let's look at the character as the comics portray him, not as you may think he would mechanically be written up.

 

At higher levels, I think Bat's belt may well be a VPP rather than a multipower. "What a coincidence - the Bat-Pineapple Juicer is just the right gadget for the situation."

 

It's possible, but foci rules are very specific that frameworks are considered one single power for purposes of destruction. If Bat's can't have everything destroyed in one shot, maybe he shouldn't have made his utility belt as a framework.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

And just for the record, no, I don't allow frameworks as slots in frameworks, Farkling And that IS an outright ban (Ok, no one's ever tried to persuade me, but still...) Say, out of curiosity, where do you stand on the "power in a framework boosting a power outside the framework" debate?

Buying a power in a framework to boos a power outside a framework is not inherently abusive. I'd check it out with a magnifying lense but I wouldn't ban it.

 

The problem I have with some of the opinions on this thread about frameworks is that it ignores the construction of the character in play. Some balanced powers would simply not be available for a reasonable price with the hard and fast "there is only one way to do things in my campaign" approach.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Gary

What player's tend to choose is a completely different subject than the "value" of a power. For example, most players would tend to choose a 12d6 natural attack as opposed to a 18d6 OIF attack, but the "values" are equivalent.

 

I would say that a single 90 pt attack is roughly in the same ballpark in terms of "value" to a 5 slot 60 pt multipower.

If I was a power gamer in a group, I'd take the 18d6 OIF attack any day.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Farkling

/QUOTE/

" Say, out of curiosity, where do you stand on the "power in a framework boosting a power outside the framework" debate?"

/ENDQUOTE

 

It's allowed by the rules...though the implication is it should be a different power. I would allow the Pulsar construct up to a certain level of additional dice...probably even over the active point cap. No linked limitation, and only working in conjunction WITH that slot. The limitation on the dice MAKES it a different power by definition. The feel would only be right if it the outside power is "smaller" than the slot.

 

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Agent X

Hey, if that's the way you guys like to play that's fine. You posted your rationale and I absolutely disagree with it. BTW, when people bring up the X-Men to justify a certain view of character construction they necessarily are leaving a few characters out.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Which characters? Speak up...let's see the examples. You are not allowed to use any characters created by Rob Liefeld as your source material. They pretty much ARE all designed with multiple frameworks, and probably even frameworks within frameworks if we analyzed them.

 

/QUOTE/

" You see characters in the book with 1 power attacks such as Cyclops all the time"

/ENDQUOTE/

 

Anyone who doesn't believe Cyclops has a Multipower hasn't seen a lot of him in the comics. Of course, I have heard that they changed the flexibility of his powers in recent years...

 

I prefer purchasing gmaes and Hero books to comix...I can't budget both.

I've read some of the Silver Age and Iceman and Marvel Girl (and what about Mimic?) could be built in more than one way. When you hit the Uncanny X-Men, most of the characters are very versatile and very powerful. You didn't have to worry about me bringing up Liefeld. I avoided his work like the plague.

[prestidigitator]

Originally posted by Rene

I was never much of a Batman fan. I have a superstrong suspension of disbelief, I can believe in Kryptonian aliens, mutants, and Olympian Gods with no trouble, but I find it hard to believe in a guy that has every damned skill in the book and is an unparalled master with them all.

 

Nothing gets to me more than some people saying Batman is the best superhero there is, because he is the only one who is "human" or whatever. He is only human in a strictly technical physical sense. Batman never loses (Bane had to cheat a lot to best him, throwing every Batman villain against him to wear him out). Not even James Bond is so irritating.

 

But I have to admit I kinda like how some writers like Grant Morrison deal with Batman. It's funny in a almost satirical way to see how outrageous they can make Batman. Then it becomes something more openly like mind-boggling science fiction.

 

I think Captain America or even Nightwing, for instance, are finer examples of supernormals who're still formidable, but can't perform brain surgery while composing symphonies and designing computer circuitry. Even Reed Richards is mostly limited to physical sciences only.

 

You can't do Batman in less than 700 pts. The 'most human of all superheroes' my ass.

LOL. Right on! I personally have a bit of difficulty with Batman having lasted so long in a superhero world, when he could be killed with something so simple as a single bullet.

 

Decent physical prowess, vast intelligence, experience, and a butt-load of skills can really only get you so far. Unless you want to talk about my 250-point supra-genius with Int 260 (10^75 times more intelligent than your average joe), who just sits in the back room and decides which arrangement of dominoes will cause Chaos Theory to bring about the downfall of his enemies....

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Gary

Just how many villains are capable of stopping the player's special effects? In the majority of encounters, the big dice attack is better than the small dice multipower. In some encounters, the small dice multipower is much better than the big dice attack. You see characters in the book with 1 power attacks such as Cyclops all the time, but villains rarely find a way to specifically neutralize that single power.

 

First, those "1 power attacks" are rarely so unidimensional, and regardless, yes, as soon as a super's schtick is well-known, you bet your bippy it's more easily exploited than an MP. At least that's what I've seen - in the source material as well as the roleplaying. Obviously your mileage varies.

 

In the majority of encounters, having flexibility is on par with having a big attack, if not better. Generally, I'd say it might be a bit better, but not by much because EC and MP frameworks are pretty well balanced. Something you've yet to discuss in terms of actual play as opposed to the theroetical NPCs you and Hugh are tossing back and forth.

 

Yeah, the no 0 end powers in a EC really helps. In the bad old days, people would routinely put armor and damage reduction in the EC.

 

I see the drain one drain all aspect as being fundamental to the nature of a EC. If you don't want any drain to zap your FF at the same time as your flight, then maybe you shouldn't have accepted all those point savings, or accepted a lesser savings.

 

Gary, do you care to address the SFX examples I've given instead of speaking in generalities? Otherwise I'll simply ignore your point on this as well. Well, let me go a step further - you keep acting as if I and others have said that drain-one-drain-all is "bad". I've merely pointed out that it should rest on SFX - an explanation Steve Long (or any rational HERO player) has given many times over to explain aberrations.

[prestidigitator]

I think someone should kill this thread before the server goes critical....

[badger3k]

Originally posted by prestidigitator

LOL. Right on! I personally have a bit of difficulty with Batman having lasted so long in a superhero world, when he could be killed with something so simple as a single bullet.

 

Decent physical prowess, vast intelligence, experience, and a butt-load of skills can really only get you so far. Unless you want to talk about my 250-point supra-genius with Int 260 (10^75 times more intelligent than your average joe), who just sits in the back room and decides which arrangement of dominoes will cause Chaos Theory to bring about the downfall of his enemies....

 

You forget - Batman has the power of Merchandising! And a huge fan base with lots of money. The old detective comics Batman was more believable than he is now - the writers take a lot of license. Maybe give him a huge luck pool to reflect his fan support, which crosses dimensions to the DC universe to keep him alive (Transdimensional Luck Reserve, only to win?)

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Gary

What player's tend to choose is a completely different subject than the "value" of a power. For example, most players would tend to choose a 12d6 natural attack as opposed to a 18d6 OIF attack, but the "values" are equivalent.

 

I would say that a single 90 pt attack is roughly in the same ballpark in terms of "value" to a 5 slot 60 pt multipower.

 

To be clear, I've found more players prefer to have 2-5 different attacks than one really big one.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by Gary

It wasn't really a problem because of point caps, and the fact that everybody built the same way. The odd few characters that didn't build that way were either unique wonderful designs, or simply had fewer points to spend on skills and thus were less effective in non-combat. However, a certain level of GM favoritism was still needed so that the newer players who weren't as good at designing characters, still had a reasonable amount of airtime.

 

Okay, so I'm missing the problem re ECs here in your actual gameplay...

 

EDIT - first that wasn't intended quite as smart-ass as it sounded - but second from reading other posts, it sounds like you don't know if it's been a problem as you've had characters who are nearly all EC-based or characteristics-based.

 

But given the characteristic-based ones balance with the EC ones...it seems the system is balanced....right? Wrong?