VPPs in 6th

[Doc Democracy]

I have not been a huge fan of Variable Power Pools - in games I have used them they have proved very powerful for experienced players who did not interrupt the flow of the game manipulating them and frustrating and slow for inexperienced players.

 

However, I have thought that they are a very necessary part of the game if it is to accomplish many things central to particular games.

 

For this reason I am hazy on the changes to the rules. As I have been building a gadgeteer for Day after Ragnarok (see other thread) I have been reading the rules more closely and my goodness they are different from what I remember.

 

It feels like it was clever to break the link between the pool and the control cost (is that a 6th edition innovation?).

 

I was wondering if there is an opposite to me that uses VPPs all the time and might be willing to tell me how sixth edition changes have impacted on the gameplay and use of VPPs???

 

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

The break between control cost (and maximum AP) and pool is a 6e innovation.

 

I've been running a character with a pool somewhat larger than his maximum AP which has worked quite well. However, I have been using the VPP approach as a Multipower with unlimited slots (0 phase to change with no skill roll) rather than a pool of abilities that can only be changed with difficulty, but can manifest brand new abilities on the fly. He could manifest new abilities, but I think my existing list is broad enough that any new abilities would be variations on a theme rather than brand new abilities.

 

Any character with enough versatility in his chosen SFX will reach a point where the VPP is the only practical means of allowing for the diversity of abilities available to him.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

I have been tempted to try replacing multipowers so that the only framework in my games is VPP. I might put a variable limitation on the control cost where there is either the need to work from a defined list of powers or cost more END or something...

[incrdbil]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

I love VPP's, and the 6e improvements only increased it. Though I have yet to do it, running an absorbtion based character with a VPP with a big control cost, but low starting reserve seems to have promise now.

 

But other than that, there isn't a huge change. As always VPP's abuse factor lies in just how flexible it is allowed to be. The less limited it is in power and FX ability, the more cautious you have to be...but then, as a GM, you already excercised that caution when you approved characters for the campaign--the same judgement has to be used with what powers you allow a VPP using character to access. As a GM, you hve to be comfortabel saying 'No, you can't manifest that power, even if the mechanics of your pool say so'. Just because they have a Cosmic VPP doesn't mean you allow them to raise the dead, to use postcognition, or Detect: Vulnerability, discriminitory before wielding the 1d6 EB NND does body area effect megascale 100000 km selective 0 END completely invisible, effects are invisible, 0 end, continuous uncontrollable affects desol transmimensional autofire..did I forget anything?. Power availability to a VPP should be understood to be with GM permission not just on a rules basis, or FX basis, but at times, a situational basis.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

I really like what 6th edition did for VPPs as it allows for even more flexibility in build. The only example I can give, is for a character I recently played who was a speedster mage. He had a magic VPP that had a larger control than its real point cost, but some limitations that had to be on each power he built with it (like incantations and gestures). What this ment, was that he would build one 60 AP power, which fit into 34RP after limitations (and he only could have 34 RP of powers). Thus he could have any one 60AP power, but never more than one, which speed up game play greatly.

[Zephrosyne]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

Hmm, I'm working on a campaign now. I don't have a problem with the concept of Variable Power Pools and in some cases they are necessary . I just think they are too cheap for what they do. I am just not sure how I want to adjust the point cost. I have number crunched a few ideas but I haven't decided on a solution. Of course, Doc Democracy, that doesn't help you at all with your query since I don't yet have 6th edition practical application to share with you.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

It is not unhelpful though. Where do you think the cost break lies - too little AP or pool and they are pretty ineffectual - too much and everything becomes possible...

 

The rules do not give much guidance on how to draw the lines. in a 60AP game - what should the pool of a VPP be set at??

 

 

Doc

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

The rules do not give much guidance on how to draw the lines. in a 60AP game - what should the pool of a VPP be set at??

 

The issue isn't the size of the Pool - it's the Control Cost. If you want Powers in the Pool restricted to 60 AP, then you restrict the Control Cost to 60 (30 points). (Somewhat confusingly, the cost of Control Cost is 1 character point for 2 points of CC.)

[incrdbil]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

Hmm' date=' I'm working on a campaign now. I don't have a problem with the concept of Variable Power Pools and in some cases they are necessary . I just think they are too cheap for what they do. [/quote']

 

Sometimes, I think other frameworks are too costly. Ran into the situation--someone doing a huge multipower, realized a VPP was cheaper. Is it the fault of a VPP being too cheap, or that large multipowers cost too much, especially when filled with ultr-slotted powers?

[incrdbil]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

It is not unhelpful though. Where do you think the cost break lies - too little AP or pool and they are pretty ineffectual - too much and everything becomes possible...

 

The rules do not give much guidance on how to draw the lines. in a 60AP game - what should the pool of a VPP be set at??

 

 

Doc

 

 

the Control Cost should allow 60 active points of power to be used. The reserve can be whatever the GM feels comfortable in terms of how many powers he wants the player to be be able to run at once.

 

A a reserve larger than the control costs makes sense for many characters--especially gadgeteers with tons of gadgets or devices all of a moderate power level.

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

Sometimes' date=' I think other frameworks are too costly. Ran into the situation--someone doing a huge multipower, realized a VPP was cheaper. Is it the fault of a VPP being too cheap, or that large multipowers cost too much, especially when filled with ultr-slotted powers?[/quote']

 

I think this comes down to MP's and VPP's serving different purposes. The VPP is intended for maximum flexibility. If your concept isn't quite as flexible and you only need a few slots, the MP will be cheaper. I could do some number-crunching and try to figure out how many MP slots it takes to justify switching to a VPP, but that would be dependent on so many assumptions about the character concept and the campaign rules that it's probably pointless -- someone else using different assumptions would get a completely different answer.

 

Best advice: if it's not an obvious choice prior to the build, then build it both ways and see which one works best.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

The issue isn't the size of the Pool - it's the Control Cost. If you want Powers in the Pool restricted to 60 AP' date=' then you restrict the Control Cost to 60 (30 points). (Somewhat confusingly, the cost of Control Cost is 1 character point for 2 points of CC.)[/quote']

 

in sixth edition it is. I am still not caught up with the change in the rules...

 

However, the question would remain - how big a power should a VPP be allowed to host if you are in a 60AP game.

 

the Control Cost should allow 60 active points of power to be used. The reserve can be whatever the GM feels comfortable in terms of how many powers he wants the player to be be able to run at once.

 

So the owner of the VPP gets the flexibility at full power?

 

Doc

[Zephrosyne]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

Well, a Variable Power Pool with a Pool of 60 points, a Control Cost of 60 Active Points, and Cosmic Advantage (necessary for this comparison) cost 150 points. This is the same cost as a Multipower with a 60 point Reserve and 15 fixed slots. This assumes a fairly broad special effect, in other words, no cost break for the Control Cost to the Variable Power Pool (e.g. Cosmic Powers, Magic Powers, etc.).

 

On the other hand, if the Variable Power Pool has a more limited special effect such as Fire Powers, worth say a -1/2 Limitation, then the Variable Power Pool Cost 120 points, which is the equivalent of a Multipower with 10 slots, which would have not such Limitation.

 

I guess one has to decide how much is such great flexibility worth. Me personally, while I realize that 15 or 10 slots is a lot for a Multipower, it isn't a whole lot compared to "anything I can come up with for my special effect that the gm is going to be willing to allow" and this is assuming a gm like me who doesn't exactly buy "anything I can pull out of my ass is acceptable." I just think the Variable Power Pool is too cheap for what it does. Frankly, I'm inclined to alter the cost of the Control Cost since that is what gets modified. My two cents of course. Once again, lol, probably not too much help to you.

[Chimera 12]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

If there's an AP cap for the campaign, I'd be tempted (more on a theoretical basis, I haven't actually tested this) to go with a guideline like "no single power in the pool can be bigger than the cap and the total of control + pool cost can't exceed the cap either". So, a 'basic' VPP for a 60 AP campaign might be one with a 20-point control cost and a 40-point reserve for effective access to 40 AP of freeform power with no major constraints other than the default VPP ones. Or it could have a 30-point control cost (maximum) and correspondingly only a 30-point pool, forcing the user to come up with at least -1 worth of Limitations for any actual 60-point power drawn from it. Or some other configuration adding up to no more than 60 points total (counting Advantages but not Limitations since we're concerned about "active" rather than Real Points).

 

Obviously, any actual 'cosmic' pool following these guidelines for this kind of campaign would be pretty darn small. I'd consider that more of a feature than a bug, though -- IMO, in a campaign where one character's just a 60-AP brick and another a 60-AP flying blaster character #3 really shouldn't have 60 AP of INSTANT DO-ANYTHING PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWAH!!!

 

*cough* *ahem* Well, you get my point.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

the Control Cost should allow 60 active points of power to be used. The reserve can be whatever the GM feels comfortable in terms of how many powers he wants the player to be be able to run at once.

 

A a reserve larger than the control costs makes sense for many characters--especially gadgeteers with tons of gadgets or devices all of a moderate power level.

 

Conversely, if your OAF Omni-Staff allows you to access a variety of 60 AP attacks, a control cost of 30/2 = 15 for 60 AP powers and a 30 point pool makes for an appropriate result.

 

in sixth edition it is. I am still not caught up with the change in the rules...

 

However, the question would remain - how big a power should a VPP be allowed to host if you are in a 60AP game.

 

So the owner of the VPP gets the flexibility at full power?

 

Would you require a character with less flexibility to take a lesser power reduction? For example, would a character with a 5 slot Multipower be restricted to less than 60 AP for his multipower slots? While I've generally allowed the AP max for any power in the pool, I could see a case to reduce the AP for characters with greater flexibility. Maybe a character with only one attack could have 75 AP, up to 5 attacks caps you at 65 AP. 6 - 10 caps at 60 AP, 11 to 15 caps at 55 and anything greater caps at 50 (so a 50 point pool + 25 point control cost, which is 75 points total).

[ghost-angel]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

If you want a By The Book 60 Active Point VPP then you have a few options . . . a 40 Point Pool + 40 Point Control = 60 Active Points (40 pool cost + 20 control cost). [iIRC that would be the exact same levels under previous editions.]

 

Since most people use the Active Points you can place in the VPP (ie the maximum AP of any one Power) as the AP limit, than a 60 Point Control will allow for 60AP Power and cost 30 Points, Pool level is entirely up to you - you could, for example, only allow a 30 Point Pool so the whole VPP costs 60 Points and is therefore RAW 60 Active Points. Though in that scenario you will obviously need to Limit any Power whose AP goes over 30 so it can be used.

 

If you wanted to get even fancier, and sticking with the RAW method of calculating VPP Active Points you could have a 10 Point Control (5 Points) and a 55 Point Pool, for a VPP AP Total of 60; which would allow a wide array of small AP Powers to be active at once without needed more than a few, if any, Limitations on them.

 

I have a Mystic Gadgeteer that has a VPP with a 35 Point Control and 50 Point Pool; mostly it's allowed my to have more Gadgets active at once than I would normal have had under previous editions with the same AP restrictions on the individual Powers (without wonky VPP constructs at least).

 

The 6E split of costs and levels allows for some excellent versatility in gameplay.

[prestidigitator]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

I use it for converting D&D magic. Splits the "level" of spells you can cast from the number of spells you can memorize, to a decent extent. Allows a lot of variation to be able to buy those up independently.

[Rhino]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

One of the things I realized during a discussion in a related thread i started was that VPPs are too cheap if used to recreate Skills and Martial Maneuvers.

[ghost-angel]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

One of the things I realized during a discussion in a related thread i started was that VPPs are too cheap if used to recreate Skills and Martial Maneuvers.

 

That's generally why you shouldn't use some Powers to recreate things other Powers can do, nor why any form of Skill should go inside a Framework.

 

If you use Powers and Frameworks to recreate Martial Arts generally it's to create abilities not covered by Martial Maneuvers themselves.

[Hida Tsuzua]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

Unless you as a GM really know what you're doing, keep Special Powers alway from frameworks. It's generally not pretty otherwise.

 

If VPPs are an option, huge "everything and the kitchen sink" style multipowers are just not going to be as good. If you don't want to be a VPP user and you don't want to be "a VPP user but worse" you'll have to play to your strengths and focus. There's generally a lot of powers (unusual senses, luck, and the like) that VPPs can't buy that are quite handy to have. Pair that up with a small tight multipower and you can hang out with the best of them.

[incrdbil]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

in sixth edition it is. I am still not caught up with the change in the rules...

 

However, the question would remain - how big a power should a VPP be allowed to host if you are in a 60AP game.

 

 

 

So the owner of the VPP gets the flexibility at full power?

 

Doc

 

That depends--what are the power restrictions, FX restrictions, and the limitations when the player can change the power. Flexibility is useless if the control cost is set so low the flexible powers are all useless. and of course, the more active points poured into one power is the fewer simultaneously active powers running, even with limitations.

[incrdbil]

Re: VPPs in 6th

 

:

 

So the owner of the VPP gets the flexibility at full power?

 

Doc

Barring a lot of hard to figure out arbitrary limits, yes. Hey are paying for that flexibility after all.

I don't see why VPP's should be subject to an AP limit different than MP's. Flexibility doesn't decrease individual AP limits. If so, then you have to set different AP limits for VPP's, different limits for multipowers based on the number of slots, then another limit for the less flexible non-framework powers. do you change DC limits for a martial Artist with a lot of moves as opposed to one with only one MA attack?

For the new to VPP GM, I don't recommend dive right to the Cosmic VPP. Perhaps starting out with skill roll required to change, or only allow changes between encounters or in special situations.

Another option is to have a character whose main offensive powers is in a traditional MP, while a smaller VP takes care of modifying those powers, or taking care of minor abilities. Get some practice and experience with VPP impact on your game in increments.

Heck, maybe let the villains have them first

In the end, AP's and DC's alone aren't sufficient tools to guarantee balance. They are starting guidelines. Some things you just have to eyeball, balance by feel, and amend as the game moves along.

Some rules you may have to watcch, and perhaps be more strict than your custom is. Actually forbid special powers, or other selection just based on your current assessment of their efffectiveness.

Another way to not worry so much is to give everyone a VPP. A gadgeteet, a spell learning Mage, a'master of a certain power (like a Telekentik based VPP, a shapeshifting VPP) --different enough in feel, all with enough limits to keep them from building too much on each other.