Invisible Armor

[SteveZilla]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

That's what I thought' date=' but then I thought 'what a complicated build that is for such a simple effect' and gave him a 3 point skill 'Crowdwalking'.[/quote']

 

What Characteristic is that based on, PRE? Personally, I think it could just be a sign of having a high PRE score since there is no evidence (AFAICR) that they didn't see him. Or it could be as complicated as (in 5ER):

 

Talent:

 

10 Crowdwalking: 20 STR - IPE(+1), Zero END(+1/2)(50 Active); Casual STR Only(-2), Only To Move Through Crowds(-2), Not Additive w/ Other STR(-0)

 

The people being "nudged" aside by this STR don't realize that. Its less than 1 meter displacement, and they return to their original location/path after the 'Walker has passed.

 

And how much for the skill: Crowdsurfing?

[sobran]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

I can imagine a couple scenarios where IPE on defenses might be appropriate, but it seems like IPE should only make it extraordinarily difficult to perceive what happened, rather than completely impossible. To my mind, this seems to fit nicely with the Hero System philosophy of No Absolutes. Two examples:

 

A man has been transformed into an intelligent zombie (revenant?) in order to serve as the bodyguard to a powerful necromancer. He has Resistant Protection that does not function against fire or crushing/bashing attacks. When attacked by a group of adventurers, the man subconsciously reacts as if he expects to be hurt. Several sword slashes flay the flesh from his bones in places, eliciting growls, moans, and curses. Yet still he attacks. A mace crushes one arm and a broadsword cleaves off another. It isn't apparent that either attack inflicts any more damage than the other. The adventurers will eventually realize what is going on, but it could take some time. If they surround him and beat him until he goes down, it might not even register that the killing blow was a mace hit to the skull. The characters think, "That was a powerful enchantment that kept him alive long after he should have been dead!" The players might wonder how much BODY that *&(%er had.

 

This second example comes from a peculiar vampire I saw in an anime. (I wish I could remember which one, as I know there are some fans around here...) This vampire might be defined as having Restistant Protection, with IPE, and a lesser amount of Knockback Reststance, also IPE. When attacked, the vampire is essentially 'pushed around' by the attack. A blast to the shoulder turns his body to the side and the blast slides past him. An explosion at his feet sends him flying into the air--albeit not very far. ("He jumped out of the way!") The vampire always seems to dodge attacks with preternatural speed, getting out of harms way at the last possible instant. In reality, he is hit and takes little to no damage, but the force of the blow often spins him around. The supernatural nature of the defense even protects his clothes. It isn't until they somehow pin him down that they realize he is difficult to hurt, rather than just really fast. Alternatively, a character with a Rapid Sense might be able to make a PER roll to realize the vampire is actually being hit.

[Daltwisney]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

I am not sure I udnerstand the underlying concept' date=' so it is difficult for me to reason back from there. Why not just use No Fring Invisibility? If they can't See/Hear/Smell/Unusual Sense* you as you walk past, how [b']could[/b] they know they are not seeing you?

 

*The Unusual Sense "Group" is IMO the biggest problem to this idea.

 

His idea I believe was based on something from an old 'The Destroyer' novel.

An assassin sees Chen meditating across the street, but is unable to target him to fire off a killing shot, because although the assassin does not realize it, Chen is invisible.

 

In other words, he wanted to interact normally with the world, yet still have the benefits of Invisibility.

 

The super-stealth ability is a perfect example of how I would think something like that would work, what the player was trying to justify is not.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

I know he's around here, I just saw him!: Invisibility to Normal Sight, No Fringe, Perceivable (-¼)

[Naanomi]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

Combat Luck: IPE.... so it isn't clear to attackers that they didn't just miss in the ordinary way, but instead were 'dodged at the last second'. Especially fun with some CSL: IPE so the attacker looks incompetent while they are really very skilled

[Utech]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

If the power provides clues to the observer to make tactical decisions then it is Visible. No one smart wastes bullets on Colossus because he has Visible Resistant Protection; they shoot at a different one of his teammates or opt for something that might scuff his armor. People still seem to want to take a shot at Superman' date=' even with his reputation, because he looks like he has bullet-vulnerable flesh.[/quote']

That's one way to look at it. Colossus and Superman, however, are in comics where supposedly smart opponents shoot at them with very strong attacks rather than using those strong attacks against fellow heroes with little or no armor. In games based on that sort of source material I'd absolutely expect both smart and stupid opponents to shoot at Colossus and Superman while ignoring (or using lesser attacks) against Cyclops and Robin.

 

If you are in a more realistic game, however, your GM may well want you to spend some points on something that causes your well-armored character to draw fire. Reputation might be enough.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

If I wanted a character to look like they were taking damage when they were not, I'd use something like this:

 

Sight Group Images, +/-4 to PER Rolls, Persistent (+1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates; +1) (60 Active Points); Set Effect (-1), No Conscious Control (Only Effects cannot be controlled; -1), No Range (-1/2) 60 active 17 real

[sobran]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

If I wanted a character to look like they were taking damage when they were not, I'd use something like this:

 

Sight Group Images, +/-4 to PER Rolls, Persistent (+1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates; +1) (60 Active Points); Set Effect (-1), No Conscious Control (Only Effects cannot be controlled; -1), No Range (-1/2) 60 active 17 real

This seems needlessly complex to me. IPE might not be perfect, but I would call it close enough for horseshoes and be done with it. If we're going this route, you could just as well use Shapeshift or Mental Illusions, Only To Show Expected Damage or somesuch.

 

Hmm. Actually I just might use something like that for some kind of being that relies on deception as a means of defense... Maybe add some DCV CSLs Linked to Mental Illusions or Telepathy or somesuch.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

That's one way to look at it. Colossus and Superman, however, are in comics where supposedly smart opponents shoot at them with very strong attacks rather than using those strong attacks against fellow heroes with little or no armor. In games based on that sort of source material I'd absolutely expect both smart and stupid opponents to shoot at Colossus and Superman while ignoring (or using lesser attacks) against Cyclops and Robin.

 

If you are in a more realistic game, however, your GM may well want you to spend some points on something that causes your well-armored character to draw fire. Reputation might be enough.

 

Could be sometype of taunt power? Or its really that we're creatures of habit and training. Under stress you'll do want your trained to do, but sometimes that is not the right action.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

This seems needlessly complex to me. IPE might not be perfect, but I would call it close enough for horseshoes and be done with it. If we're going this route, you could just as well use Shapeshift or Mental Illusions, Only To Show Expected Damage or somesuch.

 

Hmm. Actually I just might use something like that for some kind of being that relies on deception as a means of defense... Maybe add some DCV CSLs Linked to Mental Illusions or Telepathy or somesuch.

 

 

Shapeshift is probably the best route, come to think of it, as it cuts out PER rolls:

 

Shape Shift (Sight Group, limited group of shapes), Instant Change, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates; +1) (45 Active Points); No Conscious Control (Only Effects cannot be controlled; -1), Limited Power Power loses about half of its effectiveness (Only to manifest injuries; -1) 45 Active, 15 Real

 

The reason I'd rather do it the more complicated way is that I think it is better if we use modifiers in a consistent way rather than stretching them over whatever frame we have to hand: that leads to a much more solid and consistent system.

 

Now whilst images/shapeshift is relatively complicated to BUILD it is very easy to USE: you just look like you are taking damage - and anyone picking up the character will instantly know what the intention of the builder was.

[Naanomi]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

Resistant Defenses are not always 'getting hit and ignoring it'. Combat Luck, and similar constructs, are about dodging or being hard to hit in some way. IPE could easily have a home there more than some Shape Shift construct.

[Daltwisney]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

Resistant Defenses are not always 'getting hit and ignoring it'. Combat Luck' date=' and similar constructs, are about dodging or being hard to hit in some way. IPE could easily have a home there more than some Shape Shift construct.[/quote']

 

I don't believe any of us have stated differently. The Shapeshift/Images/Mental Illusion constructs have all been geared towards 'ignoring NOT getting hit" (to paraphrase again, it could easily be 'ignoring getting hit and ignoring it).

 

I think those constructs are all well and good, but except for wounds which involve a copious amount of blood, many of the same effects could be covered by an decent Acting Roll.

[Phil]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

That's one way to look at it. Colossus and Superman' date=' however, are in comics where supposedly smart opponents shoot at them with very strong attacks rather than using those strong attacks against fellow heroes with little or no armor. In games based on that sort of source material I'd absolutely expect both smart and stupid opponents to shoot at Colossus and Superman while ignoring (or using lesser attacks) against Cyclops and Robin.[/quote']

 

It's an interesting point. And completely off topic. But, I'd argue the opposite. It's not stupid, it's genre. Strong villains attack strong heroes. Personally, I'd like to introduce a game mechanic to reinforce this genre convention - maybe something as silly as a penalty to hit or damage or higher END cost based on comparative Total Pints of combatants!

[casualplayer]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

That's one way to look at it. Colossus and Superman' date=' however, are in comics where supposedly smart opponents shoot at them with very strong attacks rather than using those strong attacks against fellow heroes with little or no armor. In games based on that sort of source material I'd absolutely expect both smart and stupid opponents to shoot at Colossus and Superman while ignoring (or using lesser attacks) against Cyclops and Robin.[/quote']

 

This would actually be a fine example of one of the consequences of the complication Overconfidence. The player or GM knows the weapon has no chance of a meaningful effect but the character thinks "No one can withstand my Smearmaster 7000 on full autofire!" and is compelled to squander his action.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

If I wanted a character to look like they were taking damage when they were not, I'd use something like this:

 

Sight Group Images, +/-4 to PER Rolls, Persistent (+1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates; +1) (60 Active Points); Set Effect (-1), No Conscious Control (Only Effects cannot be controlled; -1), No Range (-1/2) 60 active 17 real

 

However, the problem I have with this method is that there is no Smell of blood (or whatever passes for internal fluids), or Sound of attack penetrating flesh (or whatever the target is made of), or detecting the effects of the attack upon a supposedly unprotected target.

 

Shapeshift is probably the best route' date=' come to think of it, as it cuts out PER rolls:[/quote']

 

But it still only covers the Sight group (and whatever other Groups are purchased -- at a high cost).

[SteveZilla]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

Resistant Defenses are not always 'getting hit and ignoring it'. Combat Luck' date=' and similar constructs, are about dodging or being hard to hit in some way. IPE could easily have a home there more than some Shape Shift construct.[/quote']

 

Personally, I really, really don't like Combat Luck. In a system like Hero, it feels like "going backwards" towards d20 methodology of Armor Class. Hero has a mechanical distinction between not being hit (DCV), and not being affected (DEF). Combat Luck muddied the normally clear water IMO.

 

Somehow the target is so nimble they can dodge Laser Beams (lots of Combat Luck), but become flat-footed when attacked with a Suppression Ray? Makes no sense to me, because DEF is not the appropriate power to build a "I Wasn't Hit" Power.

[Naanomi]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

Something like Combat Luck is sort of a necessity for game balance... no-armor wearing guys who rely on agility to survive in combat need *some* mechanism to survive the AoEs, Dive for Cover doesn't always cut it. I agree that it does cause some irregularities in SFX though

[Utech]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

Something like Combat Luck is sort of a necessity for game balance... no-armor wearing guys who rely on agility to survive in combat need *some* mechanism to survive the AoEs' date=' Dive for Cover doesn't always cut it. I agree that it does cause some irregularities in SFX though[/quote']

Another option is to have a GM that understands that each character deserves to be challenged in their own way. No-armor wearing guys don't need Combat Luck if the GM and players are all agreed that the no-armor guy won't be dealing with the same attacks that near-indestructible guys will.

 

If you prefer more of an egalitarian game where the same sorts of attacks are thrown at all PCs, Combat Luck is a lot more necessary.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

Personally, I really, really don't like Combat Luck. In a system like Hero, it feels like "going backwards" towards d20 methodology of Armor Class. Hero has a mechanical distinction between not being hit (DCV), and not being affected (DEF). Combat Luck muddied the normally clear water IMO.

 

Somehow the target is so nimble they can dodge Laser Beams (lots of Combat Luck), but become flat-footed when attacked with a Suppression Ray? Makes no sense to me, because DEF is not the appropriate power to build a "I Wasn't Hit" Power.

 

I gotta say, I use to agree with what your saying. I use to fuss and fume about that one! But now that I really started to embrace the special effect notion, I see that sometimes, I really have to overlook the mechanics if it gets me the results that I want.

 

On a side note, I'm working on armor that is triggered when someone dodges. A buddy of mine hates it when you wastes a dodge and still gets pegged!

[SteveZilla]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

I gotta say' date=' I use to agree with what your saying. I use to fuss and fume about that one! But now that I really started to embrace the special effect notion, I see that sometimes, I really have to overlook the mechanics if it gets me the results that I want.[/quote']

 

I wouldn't mind it so much if it (Combat Luck's build) included not only rDEF, but Power & Flash DEF's as well to make the mechanics more uniformly match the SFX.

 

On a side note' date=' I'm working on armor that is triggered when someone dodges. A buddy of mine hates it when you wastes a dodge and [i']still [/i]gets pegged!

 

Not a bad idea. But you don't have to use Trigger, just use a Limitation "Only While Dodging".

[Sean Waters]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

I wouldn't mind it so much if it (Combat Luck's build) included not only rDEF, but Power & Flash DEF's as well to make the mechanics more uniformly match the SFX.

 

...................

 

 

I think that is my main issue with some builds - you come up with a concept (not YOU, Stevezilla, a generic 'you') and then do not follow it through to a logical conclusion, leaving a disconnect between concept and realisation.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

I think that is my main issue with some builds - you come up with a concept (not YOU' date=' Stevezilla, a generic 'you') and then do not follow it through to a logical conclusion, leaving a disconnect between concept and realisation.[/quote']

 

True, but Sean, after looking at these boards for quite awhile, I think more of the problem is that when someone designs an ability, they don't or moreso can't foresee all the possible conclusions. Sometimes the weakness of a design only comes out during play. And another point is that in reality when you weigh the minor flaws to how much it does come up, is it worth it ? I know I can spend hours making huge mountains outta mole hills. Now mind you, I do think this is a fun exercise, but its more frivilous than practical.

 

I do wonder how many times Steve gets a question and goes "How did you think of this obscure detail, and is it that important?". And he probally thinks this everytime I post him a question.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

I wouldn't mind it so much if it (Combat Luck's build) included not only rDEF, but Power & Flash DEF's as well to make the mechanics more uniformly match the SFX.

 

 

You know you can add that if you want.

 

Not a bad idea. But you don't have to use Trigger, just use a Limitation "Only While Dodging".

 

Probally half a dozen each, but I think it is an advantage.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

You know you can add that if you want.

 

Of course. And when I run a game, I'll possibly house-rule it that way.

 

Probally half a dozen each' date=' but I think it is an advantage.[/quote']

 

Why is it an advantage to have your Armor only part of the time, and only when you do a certain action?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Invisible Armor

 

However' date=' the problem I have with [i']this[/i] method is that there is no Smell of blood (or whatever passes for internal fluids), or Sound of attack penetrating flesh (or whatever the target is made of), or detecting the effects of the attack upon a supposedly unprotected target.

 

 

 

But it still only covers the Sight group (and whatever other Groups are purchased -- at a high cost).

 

True - but then the benefit is proportional to the points spent on it, which is a good thing: IPE covers every sense, even the unusual ones, at a more or less flat rate, which is a bad thing.

 

Look at it this way: if you want to have a character who appears to be suffering more damage than they actually are, the reason is to sucker an opponent. That gives you an advantage. IPE on defences is an incredibly blunt tool - like I said before - if an attack is IPE then you do not notice it, whereas if a defence is IPE some people apparently want it to be more than unnoticed - the want it to have an effect on the perception of others far greater than 'you do not notice the power'. IPE on a power means that the power is invisible: not that it suddenly gains the ability to change the appearance of the user for free.