How Would You Model This?

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

Where is this build?

 

[snip]

 

I came out with this:

+1d6 HKA, Reduced END (0 END, +½) (22 AP); OIF (any bladed weapon, -½) (15 RP)

Differing Modifier: UBO (+¼); Continuous (+1); Cost END Only To Activate (from END reserve, +¼); Uncontrolled (weapon loses bonus when target is disarmed, +½) (45 AP); Concentration (½ DCV, -¼); Extra Time (Extra Phase, -¾); Gestures (-¼); Incantations (-¼); OAF (magic wand, -1) Total cost: 13

 

5ER states limitations on the base power do not apply to the caster. If that can be applied to the Reduced END (0 END) advantage then there's no conflict with the Cost END Only to Activate advantage. If so, how much END does the caster spend? 2 for the base power? 4 for the Differing Modifier? 6 for both?

 

If there is a conflict, I suppose a Side Effects (END Drain) limitation could replace the Cost END Only to Activate advantage.

 

Characters may not use Summon to substi-

tute for another Power. For example, he cannot

Summon a group of swords and hand them out

to his friends; that’s HKA, Usable By Others. As

always, common sense, dramatic sense, and the

GM’s discretion apply.

 

As to the rest, the only thing I can say safely is that the UBO must be on the caster's side of the power since he's the one lending the powers to others.

 

EDIT: Wait, it is on the caster's side, isn't it? Sorry, I expected you to put the casters stuff first.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

Hyper-Man's doing it right. Trust him, he's got this Differing Modifier stuff down pat.

[SteveZilla]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

I came out with this:

+1d6 HKA, Reduced END (0 END, +½) (22 AP); OIF (any bladed weapon, -½) (15 RP)

Differing Modifier: UBO (+¼); Continuous (+1); Cost END Only To Activate (from END reserve, +¼); Uncontrolled (weapon loses bonus when target is disarmed, +½) (45 AP); Concentration (½ DCV, -¼); Extra Time (Extra Phase, -¾); Gestures (-¼); Incantations (-¼); OAF (magic wand, -1) Total cost: 13

 

5ER states limitations on the base power do not apply to the caster. If that can be applied to the Reduced END (0 END) advantage then there's no conflict with the Cost END Only to Activate advantage. If so, how much END does the caster spend? 2 for the base power? 4 for the Differing Modifier? 6 for both?

 

 

Using this method, what happens if you want to use this on a weapon that has a built-in advantage like Indirect (Flails), Penetrating (Picks), and Armor Piercing (really sharp blades)?

[GMumford]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

The paragraph on 6e1 p288 is on 5ER p223 and it is not a build. There is nothing there about whether or not Lingering (or Time Limit 6e) or Continuous are needed for such a build to work as intended.

 

You're getting a constant effect from an Instant power with a +¼ advantage when Continuous is +1.

 

The Ultimate Grimoire PDF has dozens of examples of powers with UOO advantages. All the examples are either constant or persistant, include Continuous, or the spell discription says it has an instant effect. You might still find it on the Free Stuff page.

 

It accured to me how to solve the END advantage conflict:

+1d6 HKA, (15 AP); OIF (any bladed weapon, -½) (10 RP)

Differing Modifier: UAA (does not work unless target is wielding a bladed weapon, +1); Continuous (+1); Cost END Only To Activate (from END reserve, +¼); Uncontrolled (weapon loses bonus when target is disarmed, +½) (37 AP); Concentration (½ DCV, -¼); Extra Time (Extra Phase, -¾); Gestures (-¼); Incantations (-¼); OAF (magic wand, -1) Total cost: 11

Still I'm curious as to the END expenditure. The caster is only casting, 3? The Differing Modifier is part of the whole power, 1+3=4? If I apply the Differing Modifier advantages directly to base I get 56 AP, 5?

 

Using this method' date=' what happens if you want to use this on a weapon that has a built-in advantage like Indirect (Flails), Penetrating (Picks), and Armor Piercing (really sharp blades)?[/quote']

 

You got me there. Maybe specify "sword" where it says "bladed weapon" and include it in a Multipower with slots for Flails, Picks, and other weapons that aren't straight HKAs.

[SteveZilla]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

You got me there. Maybe specify "sword" where it says "bladed weapon" and include it in a Multipower with slots for Flails' date=' Picks, and other weapons that aren't straight HKAs.[/quote']

 

True, you're first example did say "bladed weapon", which would exclude things like Flails and Picks. But even specifying "Sword" instead of that still doesn't answer how this would interact with a Sword that already has an Advantage. Maybe it's a magical weapon and already has some DC-altering Advantage built into it? IIRC, there are also some (to me) very unusual weapons from other cultures besides Western that while having an edge, aren't Swords or even "Bladed". If both Magic and non-Sword weapons are found together in the same world, it IMO stands to reason that there would a spell (or group of spells) to improve more than one small subset of weapons.

[Ice9]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

You're getting a constant effect from an Instant power with a +¼ advantage when Continuous is +1.

Getting Continuous from it would mean the sword becomes a Continuous attack - for instance, it sticks into the target and keeps damaging them. You're just getting a defined duration on the ability to use an instant attack.

[Phil]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

A lot of very interesting thinking going on here, but it does strike me as a simple build. You want to increase the active points of something. We have a power that does that, called Aid. You can then play around with the Aid, in terms of fade duration and making it an all-or-nothing fade, adding in the casting elements, etc.. , but the build at the top seems the way to go. Though please do carry on, I'm finding it all fascinating

[GMumford]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

Getting Continuous from it would mean the sword becomes a Continuous attack - for instance' date=' it sticks into the target and keeps damaging them. You're just getting a defined duration on the ability to use an instant attack.[/quote']

 

This is what Lingering and Time Limit are for. No, you can't apply Continous directly to the HKA and get the desired result, but you can apply Continuous to a UOO Differing Modifier or Naked Advantage so it makes the UOO advantage's effect constant instead of the HKA.

 

What's in debate here is whether or not UOO advantages are already constant. The discription of UOO in 5ER describes a constant effect, but doesn't say anything about UOO advantages interaction with instant powers.

 

X" Teleportation, UAA

 

It's an instant power with an instant effect. Most likely someone who chooses this build doesn't want a constant effect.

 

2d6 HKA, UBO

 

This creates a sword (or claws, or fiery aura around the hands, or whatever). Because HKA is still an instant power, I say the sword immediately disappears. To get any use out of the power the caster and the target must coordinate their actions so the end of the casting coincides with the blow of the sword. To get the power to last longer you need:

 

2d6 HKA, Lingering, UBO

 

or

 

2d6 HKA

Differing Modifier: UBO; Continuous

 

And I agree Aid makes a simpler build, but I've never been a fan of Fade Rate, especially the way it's discribed in 5E. If you're willing to go through the added maintenance of Fade Rate, then by all means go with Aid.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

This creates a sword (or claws, or fiery aura around the hands, or whatever). Because HKA is still an instant power, I say the sword immediately disappears. To get any use out of the power the caster and the target must coordinate their actions so the end of the casting coincides with the blow of the sword. To get the power to last longer you need:

I don't think that's what the rules say and I care about that more than what you say. Can you support that at all?

[GMumford]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

There is nothing in 5ER that either supports my interpretation of the rules, or says definitely that I'm wrong. The only way it could be settled in my mind is if we had an official ruling from Mr. Long, and he stated he would not take 5e questions after December 1st. If someone else could translate the question to 6e and then post it to the Rules Questions forum, I would appreciate it.

[dmjalund]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

I cant remember how 5 or 5er did it, but in 6, you buy the power, (including advantages attached to the power, (and i think limitations also figured at this point) then you use the real (or is it active) points of this as the basis of the power which you use UAA ot UOO, and the advantages that go with that.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

see this old post:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/67857-Usable-On-Others-with-Continuing-Charges?highlight=usable

 

 

Usable On Others with Continuing Charges

 

If a Usable On Others Power is bought with Continuing Charges, does the character still have to maintain Line of Sight and/or remain within range?

 

Steve Long answered:

I’m going to rephrase this question more broadly, since it touches on an aspect of the Continuing Charges rules that doesn’t seem to be explicitly covered by the rules:

 

Q: If a power has Continuing Charges, does it remain in effect even if the character loses Line Of Sight to it?

 

A: Yes.

[GMumford]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

Under Continuing Charges, 5ER p285:

 

"Characters can only use this option with Constant or Persistant Powers. The Uncontrolled Advantage is not required."

 

So the example Armitage cited was a Constant or Persistant power with a UOO advantage. Good to know Continuing Charges can be used to get around Line Of Sight as well as Persistant and Uncontrolled. I'm not sure what this has to do with this discussion.

[GMumford]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/77275

 

Huh. Ok, I was wrong.

 

Previously on this thread I stated I found The Ultimate Grimoire PDF on the Free Stuff page. That was wrong too. I found it here: http://fitz.jsr.com/roleplay/herosystem.html

[Hyper-Man]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

Using this method' date=' what happens if you want to use this on a weapon that has a built-in advantage like Indirect (Flails), Penetrating (Picks), and Armor Piercing (really sharp blades)?[/quote']

 

I missed this really good question when SteveZilla first posted it.

 

I think there are a couple of possibilities.

1. Fudge it and allow the abilites to combine and enforce the pro-rated STR adding rules.

2. If the the base Advantages are "magical" say the effect fails like AD&D spells that could only temporarily enchant otherwise "normal" weapons.

[SteveZilla]

Re: How Would You Model This?

 

A spell that increase the damage of any bladed weapon it is cast on for the duration of a fight. It costs endurance from an endurance reserve to cast, but not to maintain or use once cast. It requires concentration, gestures, vocalization and a focus to cast, but not to maintain or use once cast. It takes extra time to cast, but not to use once cast.

 

I thought HKA was the way to go, but I think that would require endurance, concentration, gestures, etc. for each swing.

 

I thought using 3 pt. combat skill levels as a power might work, limited to only increase DC and cost endurance, but then it seems to be so much a better deal than HKA that I thought I must be missing something.

 

Any thoughts?

 

In fantasy games, most weapons are already built with Zero Endurance, so I'd probabaly go with what Chris suggested - An Aid. Something like this (hastily thrown together from old memory) example:

 

4D6+1 Aid HKA, Reduced Fade Rate(+1/2?); concentration(-1/2), gestures(-1/4), vocalization(-1/4), OAF(Wand; -1), Extra Time(Full Phase; -1/4?), Only On Bladed Weapons(-1/2), Fades Completely If Weapon Is Not Used For One Turn(-1/2)

 

An average roll of 14 yeilds 15 points, when reduced by the (usually) included Zero Endurance Advantage, gives a 10 point increase, or two DCs -- barring further advantages on the weapon. Just define the power as using END from the Endurance Reserve, and you have hit all the requirements you posed.

 

I missed this really good question when SteveZilla first posted it.

 

I think there are a couple of possibilities.

1. Fudge it and allow the abilites to combine and enforce the pro-rated STR adding rules.

2. If the the base Advantages are "magical" say the effect fails like AD&D spells that could only temporarily enchant otherwise "normal" weapons.

 

Thanks, Hyper-Man. But to keep things simple®, I'd probabaly go with an Aid build for myself. Aid already has rules that cover my question.