Questioning the Multi-power Framework

[Narf the Mouse]

The following is thrown out for discussion. I, personally, haven't made up my mind on whether Multi-power frameworks should be used; however, I'm using debate rules to state the case against. At the very least, this is something that should be addressed, if it hasn't been already. For all I know, I'm reposting an old and hoary argument. Anyway, on with the case.

 

The Multi-power Framework (MP) allows one to spend a number of points and get a 90% discount on anything bought in it. In return, you can only use one power in the MP.

 

The Lockout Limitation gives a -1/2 discount on anything bought in the "Lockout Group" (LG); ie, a HERO Designer List. In return, you can only use one power in the LG.

 

...It may just be me, but something seems off here. The Multi-power seems too effective. Taking 3 "Offensive Powers" as standard - Most characters having about five powers :

Costing things out, three generic 45 AP powers in a MP cost 57 AP. Those same three generic AP powers alone cost 135 AP - A savings of 58%. Using Lockout, they cost 90 AP - A savings of 33.33~%

 

The Multi-power does essentially the same thing, only cheaper.

 

Ok, let's try five powers. Using the same 45 AP base, the MP now costs 65 AP. The five powers alone cost 225 AP. The Lockout Group costs 150 AP.

The MP savings are now 75~%, while the LG savings are still 33.33~%.

 

Let's make one of those powers a Super-power at 90 AP.

 

Using three powers: 180 base, 94 MP for 48~% and 120 LG for 33~%

Using five powers: 270 base, 106 MP for 61~% and 180 LG for 33~%

 

In each case, a MP is cheaper and inconsistent in discount, while the LG costs more and is consistent in discount. A Lockout Limitation, then, is essentially "worthless"*, being superseded by the MP. Even at two powers, we get 90 base, 58 MP and 60 LG.

 

We have two ways to do the same thing, one of which costs more. HERO System default rules** say we use the most costly version. That is the Lockout Limitation.

 

* On a pure points-basis.

** My understanding of the rules for constructing powers from effects.

[Mickael]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

I don't know the Lockout Limitation, but I think that a Multi-Power Framework comes with much more limitations (described in the Framework section of 6E1). Perhaps after the construction is done, there is no difference in game terms, I can't answer this yet.

[dmjalund]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

For one thing a Multipower is more or less drained as a single power (so you's have to Add Unified to your Lockout limitation)

[prestidigitator]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Also, consider what happens when there are non-attack powers in the Framework. Choosing between an attack power and a defense CAN be a big deal.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Power Frameworks are, as I recall, a "reward discount" for having a well thought out character.

 

I run a fairly liberal HERO game. I like seeing what I, or others, can do to get the most out of the points given.

 

An example.

 

When I found my first HERO group here in St. Louis, 6-7 years ago, right after FREd came out IIRC, the GM let me design a 450 point character.

 

I had an idea but it was hard to squeeze everything in. GM had stated "we need a brick" so I wanted to be Cyborg dude. High defenses, massive strength, and all the goofy stuff a robot would have - Absolute Range Sense, IR Vision, radio perception / transmission, the ability to link into computers, etc.

 

The GM, after a session or two, looked at my character sheet and said "How did you do this?" and I explained it all to him.

 

He then had me re-create most of the other characters. Having not played / ran a lot of HERO, the other players did not use power frameworks in some cases, or any of the more obscure limitations. Nobody got more dice on their attacks, they just got more options, more flavor. In fact, I was one of the least combat effective, seeing as my attacks and defenses were all very straightforward - Cyborg smash.

 

MP's can be a way to "game the system" but by and large - and in the hands of a wise GM - they help you make well rounded, versatile characters with enough points to spare on flavor.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

*Slaps forehead* Also, MPs are about allocating points to powers.

 

There's a lesson I keep forgetting: Don't post tired.

[Fireg0lem]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

I think you're approaching it backwards. Lockout is for "I would normally use a multipower, but I can't for some mechanical reason." For example, if you want your Detect Zorblaxians power to not work while you're flying, then you use Lockout, because Enhanced Senses can't go in a multipower. It's a smaller discount for this reason.

 

Also, Lockout lets you build asymmetric effects. For example, if using Power X prevents you from using (list of things), but (list of things) can otherwise all be done simultaneously, that is generally best done by putting Lockout on Power X, rather than by having a humongous multipower with (list of things) in one slot and Power X in another slot.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

And again, really, balance is achieved by the Active Points. Having a bunch of 80 AP slots makes you more versatile than the brick with 80 STR, not necessarily more powerful.

[Markdoc]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Also' date=' consider what happens when there are non-attack powers in the Framework. Choosing between an attack power and a defense CAN be a big deal.[/quote']

 

I think this is the important point: a multipower works best when you have a bunch of related powers - like multiple attacks. If you are running a movement power, a defence and an attack out of it, it either means using several at low power or taking a significant decrease in functionality. OTOH, if you do have a significant number of similar powers, the cost of buying them seperately is often far too high for the utility you gain.

 

So the MP fills a useful role, at least in my games.

 

cheers, Mark

[Fearghus]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

I think this is the important point: a multipower works best when you have a bunch of related powers - like multiple attacks.

 

This is almost exclusively how I use multi-powers when making PCs or NPCs. I think of the multi-power as different attack modes of the same power. So the human torch has one blast that has AOE:cone, one that has autofire, and one that is an HKA. all have the same active points all are attacks made with the same power used in a different way.

 

While it is true you can put movement powers and defense powers into an MP I wouldn't want to make the choice between my armor and attacking.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Multipowers, in my opinion and I do believe according to the book's suggestions, need to have some theme and some "in character" reason why they all can't be used at once.

 

For instance the Electricity based blaster in my current game has almost all his powers in a MP, because he can only channel so much electricity at once.

[torchwolf]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Multipowers, in my opinion and I do believe according to the book's suggestions, need to have some theme and some "in character" reason why they all can't be used at once.

 

For instance the Electricity based blaster in my current game has almost all his powers in a MP, because he can only channel so much electricity at once.

That example is a good case for using the Unified Power Limitation, as it would make little sense if some forms of his energy output could be Adjusted while other forms are unaffected.

In 5th Edition terms, this would be "Collectively Affected By Adjustment Powers" or something similar, I believe Hyperman has used that extensively to make MP function similarly to EC.

 

Which, some may say, makes MP too much of a bargain, but there we go; it's a discount to allow for representation of concepts that wouldn't otherwise be reasonable in cost, much like EC and VPP.

 

During the last discussion I remember of the MP subject I personally argued back and forth to see how much we could hack it to pieces, and I ended up with the opinion that MPs usually work best in general with 3-10 slots, and in some cases, like the Electricity blaster, the fact that almost all powers are in an MP makes it reasonable to have many slots as that concept is self-balancing to a certain degree.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

I agree with what Fireg0lem said. Lockout is for things that you don't want to be in a multipower, either because they cant be, or because there are wildly different active point totals. It is really easy to make "armored mages" as my group calls them, with an MP consisting of an attack (or 20-3), and 1-2 defenses. If someone attacks you, abort to defense, if you attack, set MP on kill. This is one of the simple uses of MP, and is pretty easy to gage. The effectiveness becomes harder to gage as you have a larger reseve than any one power, and use flexible slots (so that you can mix and match slots on the fly). This of course costs more points.

[Ice9]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

I think this is the important point: a multipower works best when you have a bunch of related powers - like multiple attacks. If you are running a movement power, a defence and an attack out of it, it either means using several at low power or taking a significant decrease in functionality.

It can be fun though. I find the Attack+Defense MP (with a large reserve) tends toward more tactical interest than the standard "MP of Attacks, EC/UP of Movement/Defenses" setup.

 

Let's say you're a Telekinetic with TK Grasp, Bolt, Shield, and Flight. In the standard setup, you always have the shield on, can always move, and can always attack with Grasp or Bolt. Put them all in a MP, with a reserve large enough to fully power two, but not all four, and you get some choices. Allocate power to movement, at the cost of attack or defense? Maintain the Grasp while also using the Bolt, but be defenseless while doing so? Power up defense and movement fully and go ram somebody?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Multipowers aren't really "locked out" either... buy a big enough pool and you can start using Multiple Slots at a time - which, naturally, increases the point spent.

 

And your example only uses Fixed Slot, Variable Slot Multipowers are both more expensive and more versatile.

[Escafarc]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

:eg:Speaking of "Fixed", Ultra Boy wants a word with whoever idea it was to change the name.

[dmjalund]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Fixed Boy is unhappy for a completely different reason

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

It can be fun though. I find the Attack+Defense MP (with a large reserve) tends toward more tactical interest than the standard "MP of Attacks, EC/UP of Movement/Defenses" setup.

 

....

 

That's how I setup this version of Superman. 90 point reserve with 45 point fixed/ultra slots. Any 2 powers can be used at a time when 3 would be ideal.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

As already pointed out, you can use more than one power at a time in a MP, so your basic premise is based on a misunderstanding of the rules. Also, someone said that drains affect an entire MP, which is also false, but many GMs seem to rule this way anyway because they feel it's more balanced.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Look, I've already posted that I was too tired when I posted that and that I got things wrong.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Look' date=' I've already posted that I was too tired when I posted that and that I got things wrong.[/quote']

 

Yeah, but we'll debate this for a dozen or so more posts anyways . . . it's the Hero Way.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Fine, but leave my extremely tiredness (Insomnia for two nights) induced wackiness out of it, k?

[prestidigitator]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Yeah' date=' but we'll debate this for a dozen or so more posts anyways . . . it's the Hero Way.[/quote']

 

No we won't!

[prestidigitator]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

Fine' date=' but leave my extremely tiredness (Insomnia for two nights) induced wackiness out of it, k? [/quote']

 

Okay. (That's three. )

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Questioning the Multi-power Framework

 

...What, you're counting my episodes of insomnia-induced wackiness now?

 

Objection!