I've got you

[Enforcer84]

Re: I've got you

 

Quite right too' date=' but I do like to have a nice convoluted discussion about the rules when I'm not playing a good game [/quote']

 

...ok you got me, I do too. Carry on.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: I've got you

 

One example used repeatedly in this thread and former, similar ones is that of being able to fly while handcuffed. This usually ilicits the (IMO correct) response that handcuffs not stopping movement is a Limitation on the handcuff "Entangle". But what about other types of Entangles that wouldn't prevent normal Flight but would prevent winged (Restrainable) Flight? A lasso or bolo around the torso would not prevent Superman style Flight and would (ideally) be built with a Limitation to represent that. But a bolo or lasso around the torso of someone with shoulder blade mounted wings could very well inhibite the characters Flight, despite the Limitation on the Entangle/bolo/lasso.

 

It has also been pointed out that you can only use Velocity from Movement to add to your initial Casual STR break out attempt, after which you are no longer moving and no longer get the bonus. I would argue that if someone's Flight is Restrainable they would not even get that initial Velocity bonus. The moment the wings (or whatever) are Entangled (Grabbed, whatever) the power is no longer in use, thus no bonus.

 

Thirdly, it has been mentioned that at least some people require a certain amount of space to use full size wings. This may not be universal, but seems relatively common and fits well with "common and dramatic sense".

 

I think those three points make Winged Flight (or similarly restricted Flight) worth some Limitation. Is it worth the full -1/2? Maybe not. I'd argue it is worth at least the -1/4 version of Restrainable. YMMV.

 

Of course, a lot of this depends on the SFX of the Flight (ie. why it's Restrainable/Limiting), the interpretation of the GM, and to some degree the campaign in general.

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

That seems a very sensible approach. Of course one way to look at modifiers is that a competent GM will make sure that the power is limited to the relevant extent, so the actual value matters not BUT as a regular GM, I much prefer to have everything reasonably defined beforehand as it is a lot less work to keep track of that way, and that is always easier to do if the limitation makes sense to you.

 

Ha! I've just thought of another 'wings' limitation:

 

-1/4 Feathered

If disabled or held, the character's wings may be plucked and will not work until the feathers grow back. Plucking takes a full turn or more, and will be partially effective if less time is available. Some AoE attacks or attacks targeted at the wings may have a similar effect.

 

Oh the indignity!

[bigbywolfe]

Re: I've got you

 

Wings also won't work in space. Okay, I know that won't matter in most campaigns/vaccuums, but I've played in Champions games with a "vaccuum Change Environment". Probably not worth anything by itself, but when added to the other little things...

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: I've got you

 

Oh the indignity!

 

"Fortunately, Ah keep mah fethuhs numbered for just such an emergency." - Foghorn Leghorn

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

Wings also won't work in space. Okay' date=' I know that won't matter in most campaigns/vaccuums, but I've played in Champions games with a "vaccuum Change Environment". Probably not worth anything by itself, but when added to the other little things...[/quote']

 

So they won't work in space, they won't work in not enough space. I wish they would makeup their minds.

[Christopher]

Re: I've got you

 

I am still not certain we are understanding the rules the same way:

The rules explicitly allow the grabbed character to drag his grabber along (6E2 64). And as shown, there is precendence for this in the source material.

Also note the Rules for "Stopping moving objects" (6E2 26) wich say something very different about stopping anything with velocity/movement powers via a grab. I also think there are enough examples where "jet boots" where used to escape a grab (Batman Beyond leaps to mind), so the rule with "cannot add movement to escape" might only apply to to Running/Other restrainable movement powers (even a grip like the one from Solomon Grundy in the Video would block wings, despite only targetting the arms).

 

Of course when you are grabbed this is certainly a "bad grip" on the enemy, so it might be a good choice to apply Lifting Modifiers from APG I 10 and Encumberance rules. Also the grabber might be able to abort to "let go", but most won't do that (because they know the character is more dangerous when free).

 

So, in my understanding the rules say nothing about: "Your grabbed, you stop and can't use your movement powers". And if they do, it's propably a mistake in the writeup. I think using the rules for Stopping Objects + Encumberance for dragging something along give us way better results than just saying "it's grabbed, it stops and can't use non-restrainable movement powers.

 

 

Entangles:

If it prevents movement powers from beign used (and thus added to STR) depends on the SFX. Asuming your Jetboots have no "Blast" Mode (wich you could use to do damage), I think usign them should add to your STR when trying to damage most physical entangles.

[Bloodstone]

Re: I've got you

 

So, you buy Flight and your sfx is wings, and you take the limitation 'Restrainable'.

 

What does that mean?

 

If that area or part of the body is Grabbed' date='Entangled, or otherwise restrained, the character [b']cannot use the power[/b].

 

How does this matter, if most movement is stopped by grabs or entangles anyhow?

 

Well, the dude with entangled wings can't use them for the bit in bold:

 

A character attempting to escape immediately with Casual STR may apply half his STR bonus from an Escape-based Martial Maneuver (such as Martial Escape)' date=' but may not apply bonus dice from using Contortionist, a Movement Power, or the like. [b']In later Phases, he may use half the bonuses from Contortionist and/or Movement Powers to increase a Casual STR roll to break out, but using either or both converts the use of Casual STR to a Half Phase Action. He can add full Contortionist and/or Movement Power bonuses to a normal, full-STR damage roll to break free.[/b]

[Reality]

Re: I've got you

 

I realize that I may not have the extensive knowledge of the rules that the more experienced gamers here possess. However, I've given this problem some thought, and I'd like to make a case for the Restrainable Flight as a reasonable one in the case of Grabs and Entangles.

 

 

ENTANGLE

 

 

The text of the Entangle Power states that "Typically an Entangle completely immobilizes a character, making it impossible for him to move or use any Movement Powers except Teleportation, but the exact effects depend on the special effect of the Entangle and the Movement Power." This description gives us two "outs" for our purposes. The first, the use of the word "typically," makes what follows a guideline rather than a hard and fast rule. The second, the latter half of the sentence, makes it clear that some applications of Entangle and Movement Powers would allow the character to move even while Entangled. For example, a glob of tar would likely stick a person to the ground, while leg shackles would not. In the latter case, the Entangled character could move using his legs, though probably no faster than 1m per Phase. His flight, however would remain unrestricted. It all depends on the nature of the two Powers.

 

 

Also, the effect of the Entangle only restrains arms and legs (6E1 215, Basic Entangle Effects). Although the text does not state this explicitly, we can presume that, since the typical character has only two of each of these limbs, the typical Entangle restrains 4 limbs. If the character's Flight comes from some other, extra limbs, then the attacker would have to declare which four limbs his Entangle would restrain, leaving the remaining two limbs available. Under this interpretation, it would take two, or more, successful Entangles to completely restrain all limbs. If the attacker only Entangled the arms and legs, the target could still fly using his wings. Likewise, if he restrained wings and legs, the target could still attack (but at 1/2 OCV), and if he restrained wings and arms, the target could still run, kick (at 1/2 OCV), jump, etc.

 

 

Granted, this interpretation of the rules would also make it harder to restrain those with Extra Limbs, but Autofire bought for Entangle could help ensure sufficient restraints on a target. Alternatively, the character could take an Advantage to his Power (we'll call it Expanded Effect) to target more than four limbs,with each extra limbs snared a +1/2 Advantage. Conversely, the Set Effect Limitation could reduce the number of limbs Entangled by one for a -1/2 Limitation rather than by two for a -1 Limitation. The GM would have to determine what effect having only one limb (or three out of four) free would impose on the target, depending on the situation.

 

 

GRABS

 

 

We can make a similar argument for Grabs. The Grab maneuver allows the attacker to Grab two limbs, usually the arms. If the attacker Grabs the target's hands, the target can still use his legs, and can still use other limbs, such as wings. If the attacker Grabs the target's wings, the target cannot fly, but can use his arms and legs as normal. The attacker would have to use the Multiple Attack Maneuver to restrain more than two limbs at a time.

 

 

As for Grabs automatically reducing the target's movement to 0m, I ask you if this would work if a normal human tried to Grab a moving Buick? It would not, since the Buick weighs much more than a normal human, and has a lot of momentum. No matter how much the human digs in, the Buick will keep going. The rule on 6E2 63 may work for characters of similar weight at low relative speeds, but move beyond that limed range and common sense will override the rule. To resolve this, I'd compare the AP's of Movement with the AP's of the STR necessary to lift the attacker's weight; if the latter is more or equal, use the rule on 6E2 63, otherwise the grabbing character gets dragged along, and the target may suffer Encumbrance for it. Of course, if the grabbing character Grabs the wings, the target looses the ability to control his Flight, and he and his new passenger will eventually skid across the ground or crash headlong into it, sustaining damage.

 

 

RESTRAINABLE FLIGHT

 

 

Given these interpretations of the rules, Flight with Restrainable does in fact seem to limit the character in ways that Flight without Restrainable would not. If the character flies by means similar to Superman or Warbird, then you could not use Grab to restrain his Flight, and certain Special Effects of Entangle could not stop the Flight either. If flying like Hawkman or Falcon, however, both Grab and many more Special Effects of Entangle can reduce or stop the Power's function.

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

How does this matter, if most movement is stopped by grabs or entangles anyhow?

 

Well, the dude with entangled wings can't use them for the bit in bold:

 

Well, maybe he can. There are also bits that I've quoted above (I am no where near my books at present) that suggest that you can not use movement to break out of a grab, but EVEN IF YOU CAN, restrainable at this level is -1/2, which seems, at best, excessive. I am not sure restrainable, as defined at that 'cost' is worth anything.

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

I realize that I may not have the extensive knowledge of the rules that the more experienced gamers here possess. However' date=' I've given this problem some thought, and I'd like to make a case for the [i']Restrainable[/i] Flight as a reasonable one in the case of Grabs and Entangles.

 

 

ENTANGLE

 

 

The text of the Entangle Power states that "Typically an Entangle completely immobilizes a character, making it impossible for him to move or use any Movement Powers except Teleportation, but the exact effects depend on the special effect of the Entangle and the Movement Power." This description gives us two "outs" for our purposes. The first, the use of the word "typically," makes what follows a guideline rather than a hard and fast rule. The second, the latter half of the sentence, makes it clear that some applications of Entangle and Movement Powers would allow the character to move even while Entangled. For example, a glob of tar would likely stick a person to the ground, while leg shackles would not. In the latter case, the Entangled character could move using his legs, though probably no faster than 1m per Phase. His flight, however would remain unrestricted. It all depends on the nature of the two Powers.

 

 

Also, the effect of the Entangle only restrains arms and legs (6E1 215, Basic Entangle Effects). Although the text does not state this explicitly, we can presume that, since the typical character has only two of each of these limbs, the typical Entangle restrains 4 limbs. If the character's Flight comes from some other, extra limbs, then the attacker would have to declare which four limbs his Entangle would restrain, leaving the remaining two limbs available. Under this interpretation, it would take two, or more, successful Entangles to completely restrain all limbs. If the attacker only Entangled the arms and legs, the target could still fly using his wings. Likewise, if he restrained wings and legs, the target could still attack (but at 1/2 OCV), and if he restrained wings and arms, the target could still run, kick (at 1/2 OCV), jump, etc.

 

 

Granted, this interpretation of the rules would also make it harder to restrain those with Extra Limbs, but Autofire bought for Entangle could help ensure sufficient restraints on a target. Alternatively, the character could take an Advantage to his Power (we'll call it Expanded Effect) to target more than four limbs,with each extra limbs snared a +1/2 Advantage. Conversely, the Set Effect Limitation could reduce the number of limbs Entangled by one for a -1/2 Limitation rather than by two for a -1 Limitation. The GM would have to determine what effect having only one limb (or three out of four) free would impose on the target, depending on the situation.

 

 

GRABS

 

 

We can make a similar argument for Grabs. The Grab maneuver allows the attacker to Grab two limbs, usually the arms. If the attacker Grabs the target's hands, the target can still use his legs, and can still use other limbs, such as wings. If the attacker Grabs the target's wings, the target cannot fly, but can use his arms and legs as normal. The attacker would have to use the Multiple Attack Maneuver to restrain more than two limbs at a time.

 

 

As for Grabs automatically reducing the target's movement to 0m, I ask you if this would work if a normal human tried to Grab a moving Buick? It would not, since the Buick weighs much more than a normal human, and has a lot of momentum. No matter how much the human digs in, the Buick will keep going. The rule on 6E2 63 may work for characters of similar weight at low relative speeds, but move beyond that limed range and common sense will override the rule. To resolve this, I'd compare the AP's of Movement with the AP's of the STR necessary to lift the attacker's weight; if the latter is more or equal, use the rule on 6E2 63, otherwise the grabbing character gets dragged along, and the target may suffer Encumbrance for it. Of course, if the grabbing character Grabs the wings, the target looses the ability to control his Flight, and he and his new passenger will eventually skid across the ground or crash headlong into it, sustaining damage.

 

 

RESTRAINABLE FLIGHT

 

 

Given these interpretations of the rules, Flight with Restrainable does in fact seem to limit the character in ways that Flight without Restrainable would not. If the character flies by means similar to Superman or Warbird, then you could not use Grab to restrain his Flight, and certain Special Effects of Entangle could not stop the Flight either. If flying like Hawkman or Falcon, however, both Grab and many more Special Effects of Entangle can reduce or stop the Power's function.

 

First of all, never ever apologise for lack of extensive knowledge of the rules or defer to more experienced gamers. You and your opinion are always welcome here. I have been doing this for years and people are constantly pointing out stuff I had not spotted or appreciated before.

 

OK. On to your very interesting points:

 

1. Yes entangle 'typically' immobilises. What I take that to mean is that it DOES immobilise unless:

 

a) there are limitations on it that prevent it doing so in certain circumstances (for example leg irons would not normally stop someone flying, and so should be build with a limitation 'Only stops leg based movement')

there are SOME SFX (I can not think of any off the top of my head) that might suggest that flight is not an immobilised form of movement - but that there is some compensating SFX advantage. Actually I can think of a relevant thingie: if you are hit with many entangles WHILST in the air then they may not prevent you from continuing to use certain types of flight: for example being encased in stone could be a relevant SFX for an entangle, but, if you are in mid-air and your flight is based on gravity manipulation and you are normally strong enough to carry a whole load of stone when you are flying, there is no good reason why that would stop you flying. OTOH what I tend to do is assume that every power has a +0 modifier 'SFX apply', which means that there will be some MINOR advantages and limitations that apply to the power that balance. I really do not like the idea (CONTROVERSY WARNING) that every power is subject to sfx. I know that is the same thing in practice, but it makes a difference to me

c) I am not sure that an entangle typically immobilises 4 limbs (although I am not in a position to check the rules at present) but, even if it does, wings sfx does not give you extra wings for free.

 

More later. I apparently have to eat!

[Hyper-Man]

Re: I've got you

 

....

a) there are limitations on it that prevent it doing so in certain circumstances (for example leg irons would not normally stop someone flying, and so should be build with a limitation 'Only stops leg based movement')

 

I disagree.

 

This is no different than the common question of how to build a Cleric's ability to turn undead or create Holy Water.

The first can be easily modeled by a Perk (Holy Man) and Undead's Vulnerability to Presence Attacks from Holy Men.

And what Holy Water does is typically a similar vulnerability of Undead and other "evil" creatures.

 

By the same logic, whether a character can Fly or not should first depend only on whether they have have that ability. If they are grabbed or entagled the Flight should only be affected if the Flight was built with a Limitation to that effect. This is not a total disagreement with RAW but rather a reasoned extrapolation that was likely not published likely due to space requirements and a trust that most GM's could figure it out on their own.

[Reality]

Re: I've got you

 

c) I am not sure that an entangle typically immobilises 4 limbs (although I am not in a position to check the rules at present) but, even if it does, wings sfx does not give you extra wings for free.

 

I don't know for sure what you meant by that. If you meant that the wings SFX doesn't give Extra Limbs as a Power for free, then yes, I agree, but that doesn't matter. Extra Limbs ≠extra limbs. Wings bought through Restrainable Flight do not have the ability to manipulate as do Extra Limbs; yet they do count as limbs, and so, presuming my premise of Entangle having an upper limit of 4 limbs per attack, could avoid an Entangle or Grab as I described. I'd only make a player buy his character's wings as Extra Limbs on top of Restrainable Flight if the character could make use of those wings in ways comparable to arms and hands in addition to their ability to fly.

[Reality]

Re: I've got you

 

 

1. Yes entangle 'typically' immobilises. What I take that to mean is that it DOES immobilise unless:

 

a) there are limitations on it that prevent it doing so in certain circumstances (for example leg irons would not normally stop someone flying, and so should be build with a limitation 'Only stops leg based movement')

there are SOME SFX (I can not think of any off the top of my head) that might suggest that flight is not an immobilised form of movement - but that there is some compensating SFX advantage. Actually I can think of a relevant thingie: if you are hit with many entangles WHILST in the air then they may not prevent you from continuing to use certain types of flight: for example being encased in stone could be a relevant SFX for an entangle, but, if you are in mid-air and your flight is based on gravity manipulation and you are normally strong enough to carry a whole load of stone when you are flying, there is no good reason why that would stop you flying. OTOH what I tend to do is assume that every power has a +0 modifier 'SFX apply', which means that there will be some MINOR advantages and limitations that apply to the power that balance. I really do not like the idea (CONTROVERSY WARNING) that every power is subject to sfx. I know that is the same thing in practice, but it makes a difference to me

 

I view the use of "typically" in this context to mean "the most common SFX will immobilize a character." I expect most of the common forms of Entangle to immobilize a character; the Entangle will anchor the character to the ground in some way, such as with glue or webbing or tar or stone. However, if the SFX of the Entangle does not anchor the character in any way but rather immobilizes the limbs themselves (and only those limbs it Entangles, if we go with my theory of only catching 4 limbs at a time), then even a character with 4 limbs can still move, albeit slowly, by wriggling along the ground, shuffling his feet or hopping short hops. I'd force such a character to a maximum of 1m per Phase (and possibly force them to make a DEX roll every shuffle or hop to avoid falling prone). If the bound character has Extra Limbs left unrestrained, or Restrainable Flight bought as wings, then I'd let him use those.

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

I am still not certain we are understanding the rules the same way:

 

Probably not

 

 

The rules explicitly allow the grabbed character to drag his grabber along (6E2 64). And as shown' date=' there is precendence for this in the source material.[/quote']

 

I'm nowhere near my books at the moment, but if I recall correctly, that bit is about a grabbing character dragging along the character that he grabs, not the other way around. There will always be the saving provision for dramatic licence, but this does not seem like a situation where it would be difficult to come up with a definitive rule.

 

 

Also note the Rules for "Stopping moving objects" (6E2 26) wich say something very different about stopping anything with velocity/movement powers via a grab. I also think there are enough examples where "jet boots" where used to escape a grab (Batman Beyond leaps to mind)' date=' so the rule with "cannot add movement to escape" might only apply to to Running/Other restrainable movement powers (even a grip like the one from Solomon Grundy in the Video would block wings, despite only targetting the arms).[/quote']

 

Well, absolutely. It would seem that there are different rules, or at least a different approach to the rules between situations where the object is a character and where the object is not a character. There is no good reason for this as far as I can see.

 

Of course when you are grabbed this is certainly a "bad grip" on the enemy, so it might be a good choice to apply Lifting Modifiers from APG I 10 and Encumberance rules. Also the grabber might be able to abort to "let go", but most won't do that (because they know the character is more dangerous when free).

 

So, in my understanding the rules say nothing about: "Your grabbed, you stop and can't use your movement powers". And if they do, it's propably a mistake in the writeup. I think using the rules for Stopping Objects + Encumberance for dragging something along give us way better results than just saying "it's grabbed, it stops and can't use non-restrainable movement powers.[\quote]

 

Like I said, I am not near the books, but looking back through these posts at the bits I quoted it says precisely that at 6.2.63, and it is not a mistake as it said the same thing in previous editions. What it is is an attempt to prevent flight becoming unbalancing as a power.

 

 

Entangles:

If it prevents movement powers from beign used (and thus added to STR) depends on the SFX. Asuming your Jetboots have no "Blast" Mode (wich you could use to do damage), I think usign them should add to your STR when trying to damage most physical entangles.

 

The basic position is that an entangle immobilises you, and if you are immobilised it makes no sense for you to be able to use movement powers. The examples of where the sfx would not make sense for you to be immobilised tend to be examples of things that should have been built with a limitation to make that explicit anyway.

 

I mean, look at this: you are coated in ice (sfx of entangle). Obviously any kind of reaction based flight should be prevented, but there is no reason that flight based on gravity manipulation or electrostatic repulsion should be stopped. Thing is though, there does not seem to be a downside to gravity flight, whereas there is to reaction flight. The way we approach sfx is patchy, and it need not be. There have to be rules and there is nothing wrong with entangle stopping movement powers BUT there has to be a way around it. So, if entangles (unless limited to act otherwise) stop flight then you need to have a way to enhance flight so that it is not stopped by entangles. It still has to be consistent with the chosen sfx, but sfx should not replace or patch over rules that do not cover common situations.

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

I view the use of "typically" in this context to mean "the most common SFX will immobilize a character." I expect most of the common forms of Entangle to immobilize a character; the Entangle will anchor the character to the ground in some way' date=' such as with glue or webbing or tar or stone. However, if the SFX of the Entangle does not anchor the character in any way but rather immobilizes the limbs themselves (and only those limbs it Entangles, if we go with my theory of only catching 4 limbs at a time), then even a character with 4 limbs can still move, albeit slowly, by wriggling along the ground, shuffling his feet or hopping short hops. I'd force such a character to a maximum of 1m per Phase (and possibly force them to make a DEX roll every shuffle or hop to avoid falling prone). If the bound character has Extra Limbs left unrestrained, or [i']Restrainable[/i] Flight bought as wings, then I'd let him use those.

 

The rules also apply when you entangle a character in mid flight. I'm not arguing in favour of the rules - I think they are silly and need looking at again. I can understand why we have the basic position: it is straightforward and it is balanced. Working out conservation of momentum sounds difficult (it isn't), so it is not included - the rule is when grabbed or entangled, you stop.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: I've got you

 

snip~the rule is when grabbed or entangled' date=' you stop.[/quote']

 

As mentioned above in this thread several times you do get to apply velocity to your initial breakout roll (though it is usually going to be adding to only your Casual sTR) from Grabs. Perhaps it is somewhat inconsistent that you don't get a similar bonus for breaking Entangles, I don't know. It just seems a lot of people keep forget that part of the Grab rules and stating that they don't even exist even though they were spelled out in this very thread.

[Lucius]

Re: I've got you

 

Wait a minute - THAT'S the reason the rules get longer and heavier with each edition! It's all Sean Waters' fault!

 

GET 'IM!

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Feed him to the palindromedaries!

[Christopher]

Re: I've got you

 

I'm nowhere near my books at the moment' date=' but if I recall correctly, that bit is about a grabbing character dragging along the character that he grabs, not the other way around. There will always be the saving provision for dramatic licence, but this does not seem like a situation where it would be difficult to come up with a definitive rule.[/quote']

Nope, there is a specific rule allowing it the other way around.

Also note that the Grab rules (unlike Entangle) do not prevent you from using you movement powers and you can add movement to STR to escape a Grab, even after you first free casual Roll.

 

In most parts, Entangle seems to be a "Grab Power". You can even add the STR from "Escape" Martial Arts Maneuvers to it.

 

The basic position is that an entangle immobilises you' date=' and if you are immobilised it makes no sense for you to be able to use movement powers. The examples of where the sfx would not make sense for you to be immobilised tend to be examples of things that should have been built with a limitation to make that explicit anyway.[/quote']

To problem is that a lot of SFX have inherent Limitations that are simply worth nothing on their own or even combined. The same way some SFX have inherent Advantages so minor, they are not worth any Advantage Value.

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

Wait a minute - THAT'S the reason the rules get longer and heavier with each edition! It's all Sean Waters' fault!

 

GET 'IM!

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Feed him to the palindromedaries!

 

Caught out

[Sean Waters]

Re: I've got you

 

I disagree.

 

This is no different than the common question of how to build a Cleric's ability to turn undead or create Holy Water.

The first can be easily modeled by a Perk (Holy Man) and Undead's Vulnerability to Presence Attacks from Holy Men.

And what Holy Water does is typically a similar vulnerability of Undead and ot

 

her "evil" creatures.

 

By the same logic, whether a character can Fly or not should first depend only on whether they have have that ability. If they are grabbed or entagled the Flight should only be affected if the Flight was built with a Limitation to that effect. This is not a total disagreement with RAW but rather a reasoned extrapolation that was likely not published likely due to space requirements and a trust that most GM's could figure it out on their own.

 

 

How you build 'Turn undead' depends on how you build your undead In a game where undead are a feature you may have campaign build.guidelines but in a superhero game where you want to build a +generic+ Turn power, well it is almost impossible, because it depends on how the undead are built - are they automatons.or do they have minds of their own?

[Doc Democracy]

Re: I've got you

 

The rules explicitly allow the grabbed character to drag his grabber along (6E2 64). And as shown' date=' there is precendence for this in the source material.[/quote']

 

This is a very specific allowance at ther point of being grabbed. If a character is moving when grabbed then a successful casual strength roll will allow movement continue to the end of that movement phase, if the roll fails movement immediately stops. This is not initiating movement after the grab...

[Ice9]

Re: I've got you

 

Somewhat of a side note, but while "Restrainable" might not be exactly the right limitation for it, I've seen many GMs use it as effectively a "Real Wings" limitation, which has definitely been worth at least -1/2. In that context, it covers difficulties from cramped quarters, heavy weather conditions, wearing a space suit, getting hit with certain types of attacks while flying, and so forth.

 

The trickier question is something like rocket boots, which are generally less restrictive than wings, but certainly more restrictive than telekinetic flight or gravity manipulation. Personally, I would just stick a -1/4 on there and call it good. This could also apply to idealized wings that don't suffer from many of the "Real Wings" issues.

 

 

Re: Entangle - IMO, Entangle would benefit from a +0 "Non-anchored" option. An non-anchored Entangle is not attached to the spot it was created at, and the target can still move (with appropriate movement powers) or be carried without breaking the Entangle. Maybe a +1/4 advantage for Entangles that can be anchored or non-anchored from use to use.

[Christopher]

Re: I've got you

 

How you build 'Turn undead' depends on how you build your undead In a game where undead are a feature you may have campaign build.guidelines but in a superhero game where you want to build a +generic+ Turn power' date=' well it is almost impossible, because it depends on how the undead are built - are they automatons.or do they have minds of their own?[/quote']

The general asumption is that Undead are Automatons with the "Undead" class of mind, the same way robot-mooks are supposed to be automatons with the "Machine" class of minds.

So it's not nessesarily harder to make a "Turn undead" than to make a "Turn Robot".

 

Regarding the Jetboots: I propably would put it's restraibability as part of the Focus/OAID Limitation they already have.