Should I Allow This?

[Zan the Gamer]

I have a question for the Campions playing community. I am going to be GMing a champions campaign for the first time. I've tried to develop a world with rules for starting characters to represent that the heroes are just beginning to go out and adventure. Their characters are based on 250 points with 100 points in Disadvantages, minimum of 15 points in skills, and a 50 Active point limit.

 

One of the players was describing his character to me today (we start playing in a few days, hopefully) and one of his attacks worries me. Through the use of a Naked Power Advanatage and a Hand-To-Hand Attack he can do double knockback on 50 Active Points of damage (The equivilant to 50 Str w/ Double Knockback Advantage which would be 87 Active Points). But, he is NOT exceeding 50 Active Points.

 

I do not like the idea of allowing an attack THAT powerful, otherwise I wouldn't have imposed the 50 Active Point limit. He insists that because he is not exceeding 50 Active Points that I should allow it.

 

What are your thoughts?

[Chuckg]

Well, there's two ways to go here:

 

A) As I recall, there is a rule in 5e "Ninja Hero" that says that Naked Power Advantages applied to Martial Maneuvers count for purposes of determining campaign Active Point limits exactly as an equivalent # of DCs in Energy Blast with the same advantage would have.

 

I.e. -- 10 DCs of martial arts damage with a +1/2 Naked Power Advantage is a 75 Active Point attack for purposes of judging whether or not it's within campaign limits, which means no dice.

 

Or, there's option B...

 

Remind your player that you are the DM, and it's your campaign. If you says that such-and-such a power is down-checked, it's down-checked, period. If he wants to argue, point him at the part in the Big Black Book that says that the DM is the final authority. If he still wants to argue, tell 'em it's your way or the highway.

 

If he wants to *reason* with you, OTOH, then remind him that none of the players campaign are being allowed to do Double KB with 10d6 worth of Ndamage, so he shouldn't be able to either.

[KnightShade]

Doesn't really seem like he's just trying to get around the limit, if nothing else, simply because he's doing it on a KB advantage. If he bought a NND naked power advantage and applied it to a 50 active point attack, yeah, that'd be too much, but the way the damage gets applied, it functions more like a multiple attack than a single ultra powerful attack.

 

Multiple attacks roll their damage seperately (one attack roll), apply their defenses seperately, and you don't add the damage to determine if they're stunned. I'd just look at the damage that will be taken from the KB and see if that fits. Average of 10 body on a 50 AP attack roll, doubles to 20 body, average roll of 7 on KB, 13d6 resulting in 6 1/2 dice of damage hitting the ground. Just don't put walls with tons of defense around him, hehe.

[Lightray]

Allow it.

 

Then inform the player that, as you had already given a 50 active point limit, that he may use one of the two powers in his attack.

 

Hm? Makes the Naked Advantage useless you say? Why, yes, I believe it would.

 

But then, he could have just bought both under the 50 point limit and not have that problem, couldn't he have?

 

If you're inclined to be less heartless, then tell him that using both is, de facto, a Multiple Power Attack, with all the rules associated with that.

[Trebuchet]

Naked Power Advantages are an optional rule anyway. Just exercise GM's prerogative and forbid them. Simple enough.

[BoloOfEarth]

My advice: not without preparing yourself.

 

I ran a game with a player whose character had a similar construct. True, the main attack only does 10d6, and the average knockback is about 13". However, a player creating this probably has visions of smashing the target into nearby walls, or other characters, on a regular basis to maximize that knockback damage.

 

Does the character also have flight? If so, expect the player to try knocking airborne targets down into the ground, then argue that such knockback is the same as knocking the target into a wall, not the same as knocking a standing target down into the ground. (And since aerial targets have 1d6 less subtracted from knockback, now we're talking about 16-17" knockdown.)

 

Just issuing a fair warning. I could be wrong.

[KnightShade]

Originally posted by BoloOfEarth

My advice: not without preparing yourself.

 

I ran a game with a player whose character had a similar construct. True, the main attack only does 10d6, and the average knockback is about 13". However, a player creating this probably has visions of smashing the target into nearby walls, or other characters, on a regular basis to maximize that knockback damage.

 

Does the character also have flight? If so, expect the player to try knocking airborne targets down into the ground, then argue that such knockback is the same as knocking the target into a wall, not the same as knocking a standing target down into the ground. (And since aerial targets have 1d6 less subtracted from knockback, now we're talking about 16-17" knockdown.)

 

Just issuing a fair warning. I could be wrong.

 

Knocking targets into the ground only does 1d6 for 2: of KB

[Hugh Neilson]

I would treat this no differently than the STR with the double knockback advantage. 50/1.75 = 28.57 points - I might allow the character to have 30 STR double KB (52.5 AP) provided he was weaker in defense/movement than the norm to make up for a more powerful offense (not a lot bigger offense, so not a lot weaker in other areas), but if wveryone else is restructed to 10 DC, he shouldn't be throwing around an attack that's effectively 17 1/2 DC.

 

His approach seems very mechanical, not oriented to the power structure. Would you allow a player to buy 45 STR, spend 15 points on Martial maneuvers, including Martial Strike (+2 DC), then add another 6 damage classes? He's only spent 43 points on martial arts - and he does 17d6.

 

I expect your goal in restricting AP to 50 was to restrict damage classes to 10. The player, whether intentionally or unknowingly, has created a structure that breaches that limit, if not to the letter than in spirit. I would disallow it.

[BoloOfEarth]

Originally posted by KnightShade

Knocking targets into the ground only does 1d6 for 2: of KB

 

As I said, "expect the player to ... argue that such knockback is the same as knocking the target into a wall, not the same as knocking a standing target down into the ground." I didn't say that's what the rule says. Just what the player is likely to say.

 

If you read the text, it says that the character is "knocked prone in his hex. In addition, the character takes 1d6 damage for every 2" of Knockback rolled." Sounds like it's talking about a character standing on the ground, not one flying above the ground.

 

Realistically, how is knocking an airborne target down into the ground 2" below any different from knocking the same target into a wall 2" away? Because that's the argument the gamemaster is likely to hear.

[OddHat]

Say "no."

 

You're the GM, he's asking to do something that exceeds the limits you want on starting characters. "No" covers it.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by OddHat

Say "no."

 

You're the GM, he's asking to do something that exceeds the limits you want on starting characters. "No" covers it.

Yep. You might want to ask him why there was a 50 active point cap in the first place and then tell him what your intent was. This guy has to know he's trying to get around the spirit of the rule.

[KnightShade]

Sounds to me like you more have a problem with naked power advantages than with this one in particular. Any naked power ad will put an attack over 50 AP if that's what the camplaint is about. If it were me, I'd look at the end results (see above post) otherwise, just don't allow naked power ads.

[Zan the Gamer]

Thank you for the feedback everyone. I have decided to impose a DC/Active Point limit. That should take care of the problem.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by KnightShade

Sounds to me like you more have a problem with naked power advantages than with this one in particular. Any naked power ad will put an attack over 50 AP if that's what the camplaint is about. If it were me, I'd look at the end results (see above post) otherwise, just don't allow naked power ads.

 

If the character had a 28 STR, the naked advantage would add 21 for a total of 49 - no problem.