Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

[FreeDice]

Soliciting thoughts:

 

In my campaign, magic is incredibly pervasive.

 

As such, it's not particularly difficult to become invisible. Magic tattoos, cloaks, potions - invisibility is relatively affordable (think, a gun - not sold at Wal*Mart, but if you want it, it's not that hard to get).

 

Now, because of this, invisibility detection is also pretty easy to come by. I'm thinking of building this as a Detect.

 

As such, high grade invisibility exists, as well. I was thinking of building that as Hardened Invisibility.

 

Now, military grade detection would be... Armor Piercing Detect?

 

Other thoughts on how to build this?

[Rapier]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

You can add a Sense/Detect that is Invisibility to Detect Invisibility! You can easily, in theory, purchase this more than once.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

Hardened/AP is not the way to go.

 

As Rapier alluded to, the effects of any Invisibility build are absolute vs. the sense groups it is built to affect.

For a Detect to work against Invisibility it must use a sense group not affected by the Invisibility.

So in your world the most common (and special) sense group for a Detect vs. Invisibility would be 'Magic'.

Invisibility built to affect the special 'Magic' sense group would not be Detected (a 'higher' order of magic might work, ad infinitum...)

 

*Also note that a Detect vs Invisibility that does 'work' is not Targeting by default.

It doesn't dispel the Invisibility either.

It just lets the character know that there is something/someone Invisible within the range of the Detect.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

I'd probably use layers with a small hardwave and another mechanism. Namely, I'd allow the Detect Invisibility a Per roll rather than being automatic, then I'd buy better "invisibility" as Limited bonuses to Stealth, and better detection as Per bonuses to the Detect.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

*Also note that a Detect vs Invisibility that does 'work' is not Targeting by default.

 

Huh! That's sort of a Catch 22: in order to gain Targeting for free, the Detect would have to be in the Sight Group, and then the Invisibility would cover that sense! LOL. I never thought of it that way before (I generally just used the pre-built senses such as Spatial Awareness or Sonar, rather than actually trying to re-build a sight-like sense specifically to counteract Invisibility).

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

... Namely' date=' I'd allow the Detect Invisibility a Per roll rather than being automatic, ...[/quote']

 

So you are treating 'invisibility' as a special effect first.

A power mechanic already exists to build the effect that way: Images (with a Limitation like "only to make targets 'disappear').

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

Here is an old thread on a similar subject:

Increasing Target Visibility

[FreeDice]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

Hardened/AP is not the way to go.

 

As Rapier alluded to, the effects of any Invisibility build are absolute vs. the sense groups it is built to affect.

For a Detect to work against Invisibility it must use a sense group not affected by the Invisibility.

So in your world the most common (and special) sense group for a Detect vs. Invisibility would be 'Magic'.

Invisibility built to affect the special 'Magic' sense group would not be Detected (a 'higher' order of magic might work, ad infinitum...)

 

*Also note that a Detect vs Invisibility that does 'work' is not Targeting by default.

It doesn't dispel the Invisibility either.

It just lets the character know that there is something/someone Invisible within the range of the Detect.

 

My problem with this is that I want there to be more than one tier of invisibility. I'm thinking, perhaps five that the PCs will encounter. I was hoping there was an easier way than Compound Power: Invisibility versus Sight, Invisibility versus Magic Level 1, Invisibility versus Magic Level 2, Invisibility versus Magic Level 3, and Invisibility versus Magic Level 4.

 

Then I'd have to build the military grade detection as Compound Power:Detect Invisible to Sight, Detect Invisible to Invisibility to Magic Level 1, Invisibility to . . . etc.

 

I was hoping it could be simpler.

 

Do you have a rationale for not using Hardened in this circumstance?

 

I'd probably use layers with a small hardwave and another mechanism. Namely' date=' I'd allow the Detect Invisibility a Per roll rather than being automatic, then I'd buy better "invisibility" as Limited bonuses to Stealth, and better detection as Per bonuses to the Detect.[/quote']

 

The problem I have with this is that I want Fringeless Invisibility to be total unless you have the detect.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

....

 

Then I'd have to build the military grade detection as Compound Power:Detect Invisible to Sight, Detect Invisible to Invisibility to Magic Level 1, Invisibility to . . . etc.

 

I was hoping it could be simpler.

 

Do you have a rationale for not using Hardened in this circumstance?

 

Simpler in what way? Multiple level of Armor Piercing & Hardened is no less simple. It just happens to use Advantages to replace the tiered effect you illustrated in your Compound Power example. If it's a choice of making a complicated house rule vs. a complicated rules as written legal method I usually go with the latter.

 

If your goal is a tiered effect with a flat base then another option would be building this 'invisiblity sfx' ability with the Images Power with a minimum base modifier (like -10 as example) and use a variation of the optional absolute effect rules to say that no one gets a roll unless using some type of 'detect invisibility (the sfx, not the power)' ability is used against it.

 

Having Armor Piercing and Hardened interact with Invisibility (the Power) makes about as much sense having them interact with Desolidification.

Both have absolute effects that can't be 'halved' by AP.

[FreeDice]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

Simpler in that I was hoping to create an "Invisibility III" without making it a compound power of Invisibility I, II and III. Hardened/AP seemed to accomplish that by just being levels of one advantage. (I chose AP just because it and Hardened literally "cancel" each other out, which was the effect I was going for.)

 

I'll look into doing it with Images instead of Invisibility, see what I can come up with.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

Since Detect Invisibiliity is detecting the power and not the invisible person himself, then your advanced Invisibility could be purchased with Invisible Power Effects, rendering it undetectable.

 

If I were to make "levels" of invisibility, I would do it like this:

 

Invisibility I: Images vs. Sight -6 PER, only to make self invisible (-1). This is works most of the time, but even without Detect Invisibility you can be spotted at times, especially if you are moving quickly

Invisibility II: Invisibility to Sight with Fringe. Better than the the first level, but you aren't undetectable

Invisibility III: Invisibility to Sight w/o Fringe. Now you can only be seen with special Enhanced Senses

Invisibility IV: Invisibility to All Sense Groups w/o Fringe: Now you can only be seen with the special Detect Invisibility sense that targets the magic not the invisible character

Invisibility V: Invisibility IV with IPE: Now you are undetectable. Don't lose consciousness now or they will never find you.

 

For levels of Detect Invisibility, you start with +6 Sight PER only to detect invisible, and move on to more exotic enhanced senses as you go.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

Huh. Okay. How's this?

 

Invisibility, Level 1: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 1, 2, or 3 Detect Invisibility" (-3/4)

Invisibility, Level 2: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 2 or 3 Detect Invisibility" (-1/2)

Invisibility, Level 3: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 3 Detect Invisibility" (-1/4)

 

Detect Invisibility, Level 1: Perk, 1 point

Detect Invisibility, Level 2: Perk, 2 points

Detect Invisibility, Level 3: Perk, 3 points

 

Adjust Perk costs to taste.

 

[FreeDice]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

Huh. Okay. How's this?

 

Invisibility, Level 1: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 1, 2, or 3 Detect Invisibility" (-3/4)

Invisibility, Level 2: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 2 or 3 Detect Invisibility" (-1/2)

Invisibility, Level 3: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 3 Detect Invisibility" (-1/4)

 

Detect Invisibility, Level 1: Perk, 1 point

Detect Invisibility, Level 2: Perk, 2 points

Detect Invisibility, Level 3: Perk, 3 points

 

Adjust Perk costs to taste.

 

 

That's actually a great idea, I think. I like it as a Limitation on the Invis, though it might make basic invis too cheap. I'll have to see.

 

I think I'll make the Detect the standard detect with increasing advantages.

 

Thank you, I'll have to stat this out. Much appreciated.

[Rapier]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

I like it as a Disad on the Invis' date=' [/quote']

 

Not to belabour a point, but that isn't a Disadvantage, it's a Limitation. Disadvantages are a < 6E term (called Complications in 6E) to refer to "personal disadvantages, hindrances, and drawbacks a character has to confront during his adventures (6E, p414)." Limitations are applied to a power and make it less effective or less powerful.

[Rapier]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

That's actually a great idea, I think. I like it as a Disad on the Invis, though it might make basic invis too cheap. I'll have to see.

 

I think I'll make the Detect the standard detect with increasing advantages.

 

Thank you, I'll have to stat this out. Much appreciated.

 

It doesn't have to be a Perk. You can create Custom Powers, Talents, Perks and Skills. Considering the rule of thumb that defenses are cheaper than offenses, each level of Detect Invis might be priced correctly at something near 1/2 the cost of the Invis (12, 14 and 16pts...respectively).

[prestidigitator]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

It doesn't have to be a Perk. You can create Custom Powers' date=' Talents, Perks and Skills. Considering the rule of thumb that defenses are cheaper than offenses, each level of Detect Invis might be priced correctly at something near 1/2 the cost of the Invis (12, 14 and 16pts...respectively).[/quote']

 

True. I just didn't feel it needed to be a Power, since the Invisibility itself was limited. So what else, to create the SFX needed with various arbitrary costs? A Perk seemed somehow ironically just. LOL.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Hardened Invisibility versus . . . ?

 

Huh. Okay. How's this?

 

Invisibility, Level 1: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 1, 2, or 3 Detect Invisibility" (-3/4)

Invisibility, Level 2: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 2 or 3 Detect Invisibility" (-1/2)

Invisibility, Level 3: Invisibility vs. Sight Group; Doesn't work against "Level 3 Detect Invisibility" (-1/4)

 

Detect Invisibility, Level 1: Perk, 1 point

Detect Invisibility, Level 2: Perk, 2 points

Detect Invisibility, Level 3: Perk, 3 points

 

Adjust Perk costs to taste.

 

 

Well that is a lot cleaner than what I came up with, and if you are going to have custom powers defined for the game you may as well go with simple. Ockham's Razor applied!