How Do I Build This?

[Gideon]

I posted a question about linked to Steven Long.

 

I thought when two powers were linked proportionately that if you drained the greater power you also drained (or at least restricted the use of) the lesser power. According to Steven Long, I was wrong.

 

 

let’s suppose a character has a Lightning Bolt Spell (RKA 2d6 + Linked Flash 4d6). A character with Drain Magic 3d6, Variable Effect (any one Magic power at a time; +1/2), has to choose whether to Drain the RKA or the Flash — he can’t affect both at once. (A GM who wants to deal with the additional complication could split the Drain effect between the two powers if he wanted to, but that’s not the default rule.) If his power could affect “any two Magic powers at once” (Expanded Effect + Variable Effect; +1), then he could Drain both powers at the same time.

 

The standard rules on the proportionality of Linked powers (6E1 385) still apply. Draining a greater power doesn’t affect a character’s ability to use the lesser power at all, and for purposes of determining proportionality you determine a power’s “full strength” based on its current (Adjusted) cost. Continuing the above example, suppose the RKA 2d6 were Drained 10 points, making it an RKA 1d6+1. If the character uses the RKA at its current full strength (1d6+1), he can still use the full Flash 4d6 even though the RKA is normally an RKA 2d6; if he only uses the RKA at half strength, he can only use Flash 2d6.

 

 

Now my question is:

 

How do I build a power that works the way I thought linked was supposed to?

 

I know that Unified Power is not correct for the effect I want. According to its description (6E1 page 395) two unified powers are always affected by negative adjustment powers together.

 

What I want is something that represents that the lesser power is drained along with the greater power, but not visa-versa.

 

Example: Again using the Lightning Bolt Spell (RKA 2d6 + Linked Flash 4d6). The character with Drain Magic 3d6, Variable Effect (any one Magic power at a time; +1/2) chooses to drain the RKA portion of the spell. He succeeds in draining 10 points, reducing the RKA to 1d6+1, because of how the spell is built he also prevents me from using 10 points of Flash restricting it to 2d6 (although not necessarily actually adjusting it at all).

 

However, a character with Drain Light 3d6, Variable Effect (any one light power at a time; +1/2) drains the flash portion of the spell. He succeeds in draining 10 points, reducing the Flash to 2d6, but the RKA remains unaffected.

[dmjalund]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

Just add Unified Limitation - (and declare they are drained proportionally)

[Balabanto]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

This is illegal. dmjalund. Read the initial section before the power descriptions.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

Take a limitation on only the lesser power that it is drained in proportion to the greater power. That sounds like a -1/4 limitation to me. Whether you call it Unified Power with a house rule changing how Unified Power works, or call it an Other Limitation makes no real difference.

[Gideon]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

Thanks Hugh. Now I just hope my GM agrees with you.

[casualplayer]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

I thought Linking made it "one power," and all aspects subject to the Drain or any adjustment. I would split the drain proportionally amongst the Linked powers, no double dipping.

 

I'm not going to say Steve is wrong but I will say that is not how I intend to roll.

[Chimera 12]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

I thought Linking made it "one power," and all aspects subject to the Drain or any adjustment. I would split the drain proportionally amongst the Linked powers, no double dipping.

 

I'm not going to say Steve is wrong but I will say that is not how I intend to roll.

 

A fairly good example of Linked that's pretty clearly not "one power", I think, is ye olde poisoned knife. It's two conceptually very separate components -- namely, the knife and the poison coating its blade -- that just happen to end up being used in combination rather than separately, and something that happened to neutralize the poison wouldn't necessarily also dull the blade.

 

(The example hobbles a bit since most implementations of the concept have the poison only take effect if the blade penetrates defenses, which can create the impression that if you Drain the knife you actually do affect the poison as well. However, that's because the poison becomes harder to deliver effectively, not due to any actual loss of virulence...and it's due to a separate second Limitation, not simply to the two being Linked.)

[casualplayer]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

A fairly good example of Linked that's pretty clearly not "one power"' date=' I think, is ye olde poisoned knife. It's two conceptually [i']very[/i] separate components -- namely, the knife and the poison coating its blade -- that just happen to end up being used in combination rather than separately, and something that happened to neutralize the poison wouldn't necessarily also dull the blade.

 

(The example hobbles a bit since most implementations of the concept have the poison only take effect if the blade penetrates defenses, which can create the impression that if you Drain the knife you actually do affect the poison as well. However, that's because the poison becomes harder to deliver effectively, not due to any actual loss of virulence...and it's due to a separate second Limitation, not simply to the two being Linked.)

 

Yeah, well, I hate that way of doing things too. Sweep/MPA it where the attack rolls go knife then poison. If knife misses, poison misses with no need to roll. If knife hits, roll to see if poison "hits" (gets in the wound and takes effect.) Poison possibly gets a small Limitation if it can only follow knife, but you might want to be able to drip it in someone's food, flick it into their eyes or another open wound so the Limitation isn't absolute.

[Gideon]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

I thought Linking made it "one power," and all aspects subject to the Drain or any adjustment. I would split the drain proportionally amongst the Linked powers, no double dipping.

 

I'm not going to say Steve is wrong but I will say that is not how I intend to roll.

 

In some cases I think having it work the way Mr. Long intended it functions, in others I don't. That's why I posted this thread.

 

For instant attack powers having things not drained together can work really well.

 

For constant powers it often makes no sense at all.

 

EX: I am Grasshopper Man. I have Shrinking (.032m tall [about 1 inch], .0004 kg mass, -12 to PER rolls to perceiver character, +12 DCV, takes +36m KB). Total Cost: 36 points.

And

Leaping: +24m (total 28m), (12 active points), linked to shrinking (power linked proportionately, greater power is constant, lesser power can be used in any phase greater constant power is in use) (-0) Total Cost: 12 points.

 

While I understand that this is a -0 limitation, so some people would say "why bother" I think it makes sense for this type of character.

 

For ease lets break the character's shrinking down by "level". Using the chart on 6E1 page 281, this character has 6 "levels" of shrinking, and say that the character needs to activate a "full level" of the power at a time. Each "level" of shrinking would therefore grant the character +4m leaping.

 

The problem with powers not being drained together is this:

 

Grasshopper Man has all of his shrinking active (thus he also has all of his leaping available). Dr. Shrinker, uses his un-miniaturizing ray on Grasshopper Man (Drain shrinking 5d6). Dr. Shrinker rolls well and manages to drain 18 points from Grasshopper Man's shrinking. He goes from (.032m tall [about 1 inch], .0004 kg mass, -12 to PER rolls to perceiver character, +12 DCV, takes +36m KB) to (.25 m tall [about 10 inches], .2 kg mass, -6 to PER rolls to perceive character, +6 DCV, takes +18m KB).

 

Maintaining 18 points worth of shrinking now counts as using 100% of the power. Therefore strictly according to what Mr. Long told me, Grasshopper Man would retain all +24m of his Leaping even though logically his SFX says he shouldn't.

[dmjalund]

Re: How Do I Build This?

 

I think taking the extra limitation (-1/4) on the affected power to match the SFX, is the way to go