Hugh Neilson Posted September 30, 2003 Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 Originally posted by Farkling I've never seen a BODY Drain halved...why would a STUN drain be halved? I suppose those WOULD be defenses though...hmmm....perhaps the BODY and STUN drains should have half effect... An interesting question. I'm inclined to define a Defense as something that prevents loss of Stun and BOD (or other things, in the case of exotic defenses). The definition has to have limits, otherwise we get all these "defenses": - REC prevents me staying unconscious - END keeps me from taking STUN from overexertion - CON keeps me from being Stunned - DEX contributes to DCV (DEFENSE-ive combat value, right?) - EGO contributes to DECV - Hey, EGO, STR and CON all contribute to defenses! [that's more of a stretch in that the defenses don't get drained along with the stat) - PRE and EGO both give you presence defense - Denisty Increase provides knockback resistance - and so does Clinging - Regeneration keeps you from running out of BOD - Life Support is NND defense - Any common power can defend against NND's - So can characteristic and skill rolls And, since we all know players who will do so (none on the boards of course ) - Flight lets me avoid combat preserving my STUN and BOD - all movement powers are defense - Healing, absorption and Aid boost stats that can prevent being knocked out - What about my Transfer? It can restore STUN! It should cost double to drain too! Finally, of course: - The best Defense is a good Offense. Is there anything NOT defensive now? Hey, some of my disad's cause me to flee combat - aren't they also defensive? I think I'll stick to defensive powers being limited to PD, ED and the powerrs under the "defense powers" label in FREd. Either that or make them cost 4x to adjust and halve the price of adjustment powers (since they either have half effect or 1/4 effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugfromthearth Posted September 30, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 stun is not a defense. pd, ed, mental defense, etc are defenses of stun. however - if you wanted to suppress CON so that it was easier to stun someone I would probably consider CON to be a defense. Although I'm not sure about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech Posted September 30, 2003 Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 My brother came up with his own advantage called "Stunning". For a +1/2 advantage, the person being struck only gets 1/2 his CON for purposes of being stunned. I think it's well balanced and would use it more but the players don't care for it. (shrugs) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugfromthearth Posted September 30, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 hmm, basically armor piercing being applied to CON. seems like a decent comparison on the face of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austenandrews Posted September 30, 2003 Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 Hey, that's it, Suppress CON, "Only for purposes of Stunning." It's just as good as Suppress STUN but, um, a little more expensive. Have we tapped this out yet? -AA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BNakagawa Posted September 30, 2003 Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 Originally posted by Tech My brother came up with his own advantage called "Stunning". For a +1/2 advantage, the person being struck only gets 1/2 his CON for purposes of being stunned. I think it's well balanced and would use it more but the players don't care for it. (shrugs) I don't like this, either. Same issues: Can you buy this on an ego attack (eww) can you buy this advantage more than once (ewwwwwww) can you buy this on an NND/AVLD (ewww) I mean, worst case scenario: Buy a couple d6 of NND with fixed result, multiple purchases of stunning, uncontrolled continuous and your target will never get another phase. (ewwwwww) Alternately, buy 4d6 EGO attack with stunning 2x and you've got a 60 ap power that hits trivially and stuns Grond on an average roll. (ewwwww) I wouldn't allow this. $0.02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prestidigitator Posted September 30, 2003 Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 Originally posted by dugfromthearth as soon as you get an action you recover from being stunned. It happens at your dex, so the effect only lasts until your next phase - not the one after that. Wrong. Your next normal Phase is taken up while you are, "recovering from being stunned." If you look really carefully at the chart that describes modifiers to DCV, you'll see 1/2 DCV and 1/2 targetting penalties for not only, "Stunned," but also, "Recovering From Being Stunned." That means: I stun you in 6. Your Phase is on 9, which is the action you must use up recovering from being stunned. Your next Phase is on 12, which is when you are finally able to act, can activate your non-persistent powers, and finally get back your full DCV. You lose your powers and DCV not only at the point I hit you, but for the Phase you lost as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugfromthearth Posted September 30, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 I will look up the recovering from being stunned in the rules when I get home. A problem with CON being halved for stunning is that you can't buy a counter to it (CON hardened), unless you count inherent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech Posted September 30, 2003 Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 Originally posted by BNakagawa Alternately, buy 4d6 EGO attack with stunning 2x and you've got a 60 ap power that hits trivially and stuns Grond on an average roll. (ewwwww) I wouldn't allow this. $0.02 Assuming you're talking about the 'Stunning' advantage, the entire power with Stunning 1x on 4d6 would be 60 AP. There is no 2x on the advantage (can only buy once). A 6d6 Ego attack is quite powerful, also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dust Raven Posted September 30, 2003 Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 Originally posted by prestidigitator Wrong. Your next normal Phase is taken up while you are, "recovering from being stunned." If you look really carefully at the chart that describes modifiers to DCV, you'll see 1/2 DCV and 1/2 targetting penalties for not only, "Stunned," but also, "Recovering From Being Stunned." That means: I stun you in 6. Your Phase is on 9, which is the action you must use up recovering from being stunned. Your next Phase is on 12, which is when you are finally able to act, can activate your non-persistent powers, and finally get back your full DCV. You lose your powers and DCV not only at the point I hit you, but for the Phase you lost as well. Um...Right. Page 274 of FREd: "He regains his full DCV (and placed shot modifiers return to normal), but he still cannot act until his next Phase; recovering from being Stunned is all he can do that phase. However, after recovering from being Stunned, a character my, if he wishes, Abort to a defensive Action (even in the same Segment in which he recovers from being Stunned). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prestidigitator Posted September 30, 2003 Report Share Posted September 30, 2003 Originally posted by Dust Raven Page 274 of FREd: "He regains his full DCV (and placed shot modifiers return to normal), but he still cannot act until his next Phase; recovering from being Stunned is all he can do that phase. However, after recovering from being Stunned, a character my, if he wishes, Abort to a defensive Action (even in the same Segment in which he recovers from being Stunned).] Hmm. I would call that a pretty direct contradiction with the DCV chart. Maybe a question on the Rules board is appropriate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dust Raven Posted October 1, 2003 Report Share Posted October 1, 2003 Originally posted by prestidigitator Hmm. I would call that a pretty direct contradiction with the DCV chart. Maybe a question on the Rules board is appropriate. I'm a bit confused....what contradiction with the DCV chart? What chart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prestidigitator Posted October 2, 2003 Report Share Posted October 2, 2003 Originally posted by Dust Raven ]I'm a bit confused....what contradiction with the DCV chart? What chart? The "DCV Modifiers" chart on 5e, pg 245 lists two distinct entries: "Stunned" and "Recovering from being Stunned." Both of these conditions impose 1/2 DCV and 1/2 Hit Location modifiers. Since they were listed seperately, I figured they must be two different states, and the only two states I could think of that made sense for this were: character is hit, and hasn't yet come to his/her lost action--the one which now must be used to recover from being stunned--and character has used the Phase to recover from being stunned instead of acting normally, but has not reached another (normal) Phase (i.e. (s)he is still "recovering"). I guess Steve's answer rules out this interpretation, so I now have no idea why both of these conditions are listed in the chart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest C_Zeree Posted October 2, 2003 Report Share Posted October 2, 2003 Really Stunning Not what your asking for really, but adding my bit. Stun them for some time for 15 RP. Stun: Entangle 1d6, 2 DEF, Works Against CON, Not STR (+1/4), Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation (+1/4), Takes No Damage From Physical Attacks All Attacks (+1/2) (30 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Cannot Form Barriers (-1/4), Attack Must Do STUN (-1/4) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austenandrews Posted October 2, 2003 Report Share Posted October 2, 2003 Re: Really Stunning Originally posted by C_Zeree Stun: Entangle 1d6, 2 DEF, Works Against CON, Not STR (+1/4), Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation (+1/4), Takes No Damage From Physical Attacks All Attacks (+1/2) (30 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Cannot Form Barriers (-1/4), Attack Must Do STUN (-1/4) Good grief, now I've seen everything! Actually it's clever, in an utterly twisted way. But I can't wait to see someone with CON Usable As Attack to help their friends escape the Stun-net. -AA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugfromthearth Posted October 2, 2003 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2003 I agree, that is clever in a twisted way. I would make by con instead of str be a major advantage though, not +1/4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prestidigitator Posted October 3, 2003 Report Share Posted October 3, 2003 Originally posted by dugfromthearth ]I agree, that is clever in a twisted way. I would make by con instead of str be a major advantage though, not +1/4. Yes. I would make it the difference between, say, an AVLD and an AVLD that works against common defenses (I forget the exact values). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest C_Zeree Posted October 3, 2003 Report Share Posted October 3, 2003 Doin my best to "think out of the box." Gotta love HERO. Although, there was supposed to be an extra +3/4 Adder, NND vs. succesful CON roll. With the new HD v2 it stripped it off because you can't use NND with Entangles. Ooops. The idea was based off a mental entangle. The character overcomes it by rolling CON as he would strength to overcome it. Other characters can't aid through CON helping. An applicaiton of Healing does act like an attack though. Should have fully looked it over, before class rush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dust Raven Posted October 3, 2003 Report Share Posted October 3, 2003 Originally posted by prestidigitator The "DCV Modifiers" chart on 5e, pg 245 lists two distinct entries: "Stunned" and "Recovering from being Stunned." Both of these conditions impose 1/2 DCV and 1/2 Hit Location modifiers. Since they were listed seperately, I figured they must be two different states, and the only two states I could think of that made sense for this were: character is hit, and hasn't yet come to his/her lost action--the one which now must be used to recover from being stunned--and character has used the Phase to recover from being stunned instead of acting normally, but has not reached another (normal) Phase (i.e. (s)he is still "recovering"). I guess Steve's answer rules out this interpretation, so I now have no idea why both of these conditions are listed in the chart. Oh that....mmm....Nothing in the FAQ....nothing in the Errata either...most strange. Oh well....when in doubt always trust the text, never a table. If my guess is correct, "Recovering From Being Stunned" and "Stunned" are the same thing, and both stop once the character recovers, on his DEX, when next he would have an action. Not between then and when he actuall acts next. [EDIT] Just checked the Rules Questions Board. Guess that answers it for both of us. You had me scratching my head for a while there . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.