This looks legal but wrong to me

[JmOz]

OK, based on the coment under HA about making a normal HA weapon as a focus and then just using the throwing rules I came up with this version of throwing discs. it would have DEF 8 for the purpose of throwing, and the character using it would have there normal strength plus 20 points. The +4 is for unarodynamic and non balanced, a strong case could be made for the F/X not requireing it...

 

Throwing Discs: (Total: 28 Active Cost, 15 Real Cost) +20 STR (20 Active Points); OIF Durable (UT Belt: Throwing Discs; -1/2), 6 Recoverable Charges (-1/4), Only for throwing (-1/4) (Real Cost: 10) plus +4 to offset a specific negative OCV modifier with any three maneuvers or tight group (8 Active Points); OIF Durable (UT Belt: Throwing disks; -1/2) (Real Cost: 5)

 

Still seems like it would be easier to just use range based on STR...

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

Yeah, that's what I'd do. Just use a Physical Blast, Range Based On STR, etc etc etc as appropriate.

[Rapier]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

I would wave the non aerodynamic/unbalanced penalties. I would think the SFX of a throwing disc is going to both balanced and aerodynamic.

 

But it looks pretty good. I'm really settling into the whole +STR for throwing weapons thing.

[Sean Waters]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

Built like that you could hold one in your left hand and throw anything as if you had +20 STR. The idea is a cunning one but it exploits the focus rules (which REALLY need looking at) in a bit of a metagame way, which makes me uncomfortable.

 

It strikes me though that we have been looking at this the wrong way round. instead of trying to find a way to use STR at range, or reconcile why it is so expensive to buy a seperate Blast power, maybe what we really need is an advantage for BLAST: can add STR damage.

 

So: 4d6 Blast (can add STR damage) would cost 30 points, and (as it does affect damage) would mean that every 7.5 STR you use adds 1d6 of damage. To make it more realistic you could limit it with 'Range limited by STR -1/4'.

 

I mean, I can't see how that would be unbalancing in any way, it avoids having to somehow add 'ranged' to STR and it is consistent with the pricing structure for HKA and RKA. A weapon built that way could (unless you limit it) be used at melee range as well as at (normal) range.

[Sean Waters]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

Throwing discs: 30 active, 15 real

 

Blast 4d6, STR adds damage (+1/2) (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), Range Based On Strength (-1/4), 6 Recoverable Charges (-1/4)

 

Also because it is a Blast, they can be assumed to be balanced for throwing: looks a lot more straightforward than some of the ideas we've been kicking around - and no handwaving (save the custom modifier). If you had 30 STR you could get them to do 8d6 damage.

[spaceprincessecho]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

I like Sean's solution. It's elegant, and the only funny tricks involved are a logical, almost natural, extension of existing rules

[Rapier]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

Yes, I can get behind that. How do the cost comparisons look?

[torchwolf]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

Throwing discs: 30 active' date=' 15 real[/b']

 

Blast 4d6, STR adds damage (+1/2) (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), Range Based On Strength (-1/4), 6 Recoverable Charges (-1/4)

 

Also because it is a Blast, they can be assumed to be balanced for throwing: looks a lot more straightforward than some of the ideas we've been kicking around - and no handwaving (save the custom modifier). If you had 30 STR you could get them to do 8d6 damage.

 

If you could also use these to hit someone in the head while holding them, could this then be built like:

 

30/20 MP: Throwing Discs (30 Active Points Pool), OIF (-1/2)

1f Hand-to-Hand Attack 4d6 (20 Active Points), Hand-to-Hand Attack (-1/4), Slot#2 Must Have Charges Available (-0)

1f Blast 4d6, STR Adds Damage (+1/2) (30 Active Points), Range Based On Strength (-1/4), 6 Recoverable Charges (-1/4)

 

Total Cost: 22

 

(Yes I know the HtH could be 2d6 bigger for +1 point but that would ruin the concept)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

I find the easier solution is to remove STR adds for KA's. Why shouldn't a Brick be able to add "adds STR" to drains, flashes, etc.? Why can't an Energy Projector buy "EB Adds" to other attack powers? I would rather have a rule that you build a power with STR adds by limiting it to be drained when STR is drained.

[ghost-angel]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

IF you go that far, you really should remove STR Adds from everything. Hand To Hand Attack is just Blast; No Range and Hand Killing Attack is Killing Attack; No Range.

 

Until that happens the disconnect of having Hand To Hand Attack as STR+Manditory Limitation but no Killing Attack+STR is a logical inconsistency and utterly unbelievable from any angle.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

IF you go that far, you really should remove STR Adds from everything. Hand To Hand Attack is just Blast; No Range and Hand Killing Attack is Killing Attack; No Range.

 

Until that happens the disconnect of having Hand To Hand Attack as STR+Manditory Limitation but no Killing Attack+STR is a logical inconsistency and utterly unbelievable from any angle.

 

Hand Attack couold be modified to limited STR.

 

Hero System is generally a "you get what you pay for model", with STR as an exception. I'd like to see the exception eliminated.

[torchwolf]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

While Blast can of course be used without range, it interacts strangely with some Maneuvers.

 

I guess the only way to make it consistent would be to separate the damaging aspect from STR and just use Attack (or Blast) and Killing Attack, No Range or Ranged. Logically, this is probably the only way to do it, as has been stated repeatedly.

[ghost-angel]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

Hand Attack couold be modified to limited STR.

 

Hero System is generally a "you get what you pay for model", with STR as an exception. I'd like to see the exception eliminated.

 

The only logical way to do that is to remove Damage from STR entirely. Hand Attack (at 5 pts/D6) is a new Characteristic, everyone gets 2D6 free.

[Sean Waters]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

I find the easier solution is to remove STR adds for KA's. Why shouldn't a Brick be able to add "adds STR" to drains' date=' flashes, etc.? Why can't an Energy Projector buy "EB Adds" to other attack powers? I would rather have a rule that you build a power with STR adds by limiting it to be drained when STR is drained.[/quote']

 

Not arguing either side, but I suppose the answer is that, except for some pretty specialist sfx, it would be hard to understand in 'game reality' why strength should make an EGO drain more effective, whereas it is easy to understand that being stronger allows you to swing a sword harder. Until we abstract strength even further, to make 'strength' the sfx of a generic 'damage' power (and have some mechanism for determining the ability to lift/manipulate/throw heavy objects, also with the sfx of 'strength'), it will be hard to break from that paradigm.

 

EDIT - which I note has already been mentioned

[tesuji]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

Huh?

 

start with IN MY GAME this would be great for a discus able to be thrown into the next hex.

 

STR does not have range by default

nothing bought in this power gives it range beyond reach.

 

to me you would need some advantage to make this ranged.

 

range based on strength? sure.

 

the limitation OIF or the limitation only for throwing does not give this power the ability to affect things beyond reach, any more than the limitation "only to disintigrate target completely" give a 1 pip HKA the innate ability to vaporize any target or a force field "only to totally stop an attack" automatically gets to stop any attack completely even if its more than the def.

 

 

 

OK, based on the coment under HA about making a normal HA weapon as a focus and then just using the throwing rules I came up with this version of throwing discs. it would have DEF 8 for the purpose of throwing, and the character using it would have there normal strength plus 20 points. The +4 is for unarodynamic and non balanced, a strong case could be made for the F/X not requireing it...

 

Throwing Discs: (Total: 28 Active Cost, 15 Real Cost) +20 STR (20 Active Points); OIF Durable (UT Belt: Throwing Discs; -1/2), 6 Recoverable Charges (-1/4), Only for throwing (-1/4) (Real Cost: 10) plus +4 to offset a specific negative OCV modifier with any three maneuvers or tight group (8 Active Points); OIF Durable (UT Belt: Throwing disks; -1/2) (Real Cost: 5)

 

Still seems like it would be easier to just use range based on STR...

[JmOz]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

he would be throwing a part of the focus, thus the normal rules for throwing an object would apply (Max damage equals Def plus body, etc...)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: This looks legal but wrong to me

 

Not arguing either side' date=' but I suppose the answer is that, except for some pretty specialist sfx, it would be hard to understand in 'game reality' why strength should make an EGO drain more effective, whereas it is easy to understand that being stronger allows you to swing a sword harder. Until we abstract strength even further, to make 'strength' the sfx of a generic 'damage' power (and have some mechanism for determining the ability to lift/manipulate/throw heavy objects, also with the sfx of 'strength'), it will be hard to break from that paradigm.[/quote']

 

Normally, we divorce mechanics from SFX. How does STR make an EGO drain more effective? I don't know - show me the SFX of the power. Why shouldn't it be possible for my Mental Blast to add to the impact of my Ego Drain? A punch that bruises the target could logically be a PD drain which is enhanced by STR.