Bell curve spread?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I found a rules legal way to keep Figured characteristics, and not have it unbalanced in the extreme.

 

First let me say that I always felt (and still do) that they were the balancing factor on Elemental Controls, which you will notice have been replaced with "Unified Power" as a -1/4 lim'

 

So with that being my design philosiphy, I allow characters who thing is basicaly a type of characteristic (Speed, Strength, smarts, what ever) to use the unified power on other characteristics.

 

So the Flash (A speed based character) can buy some of his Dex, Speed, OCV, DCV, etc...with unified Power. It works well for me

 

I see no issue with this. Characteristics are specifically included in the Powers section to show that modifiers can be applied to them. There's no reason for Unified Power not to be such a modifier. However, this is still a marked change from Figured, which were not reduced when the Primary was drained (although CV and Leaping were).

 

That said, what would that do to my analysis, I wonder...

 

30 STR added +6 PD (6 points), +6 REC (6 points), +15 STUN (7.5 points) and +12 meters leaping (6 points) so 25.5 points worth of Figured. So how about this? Let’s have STR add 4 STUN per 5 STR, so +30 STR adds 30 points worth of figured characteristics. We reprice STR at 2 points, set No Figured as a -1 limitation on STR and we’re done.

 

30 CON added +6 ED (6 points), +6 REC (6 points), +15 STUN (7.5 points) and +60 END (12 points) so 31.5 points worth of Figured. So how about this? Let’s have CON add 2 STUN per 5 CON, so +30 CON adds 30 points worth of figured characteristics. We reprice CON at 2 points, set No Figured as a -1 limitation on CON and we’re done.

 

10 BOD added 10 STUN, so let’s leave it at adding BOD to Stun. So we get 22 STUN at stats of 10 across the board, no biggie. We re-price BOD at +2 BOD for 3 points, and No Fivgured is a -1/2 limitation on BOD. That wasn’t so bad.

 

The uglies…

 

30 DEX adds +3 SPD (30 points), +10 OCV (50 points) and +10 DCV (50 points). WOW! Let’s reprice DEX skill levels to match INT and PRE skill levels, and reprice Lightning Reflexes based on DEX with no figured costing 1 point. That’s still 160 points per +30 DEX. WOW! 150 would be easier to work with, and we normally price defense lower than offense, so let’s reprice DCV at 4 points. DEX costs 5 points, and No Figured on DEX is now a -4 limitation.

 

+30 EGO adds +10 mOCV (30) and +10 mDCV (30), so we reprice EGO to 3 points, and No Figured is a -1 limitation on EGO.

 

Done!

 

W/ Unified Power:

 

30 STR added +6 PD (6 points), +6 REC (6 points), +15 STUN (7.5 points) and +12 meters leaping (6 points) so 25.5 points worth of Figured + 30 STR = 55.5/1.25 = 44.4. That’s very close to 45 points for +30 STR. So maybe we can live with 1.5 points per +1 STR and a -1/2 limitation for No Figured.

 

30 CON added +6 ED (6 points), +6 REC (6 points), +15 STUN (7.5 points) and +60 END (12 points) so 31.5 points worth of Figured. 61.5/1.25 = 49.5. What if we added +1 STUN per +5 CON? We’d have 27 Figures, so 57/1.25 = 45.6, again very close, so we reprice CON at 1.5 points and No Figured is -1/2.

 

Now, that means we’ve kept all the ratios except STUN intact. Straight 10’s gives you 5 + 2 = 7 STUN.

 

10 BOD added 10 STUN, but we need 13 to get back to a base 20 STUN. So 1 1/3x BOD is the STUN increase. 15 BOD adds 20 STUN (10 points). That’s 8 points after application of a -1/4 limitation. If we price BOD at 1.5 points, +30 BOD costs 45 and grants 40 STUN, worth 20/1.25 = 16 of those 45 points. Again, -1/2 for No Figured works pretty well.

 

The uglies…

 

30 DEX adds +3 SPD (30 points), +10 OCV (50 points) and +10 DCV (50 points). WOW! Let’s reprice DEX skill levels to match INT and PRE skill levels, and reprice Lightning Reflexes based on DEX with no figured costing 1 point. That’s still 160 points per +30 DEX. Uniofy them, and that’s 128 points. WOW! 120 would be easier to work with, and we normally price defense lower than offense, so let’s reprice DCV at 4 points. That makes +30 DEX worth 30 + 30 + 50 + 40 = 150/1.25 = 120, so DEX costs 4 points, and gets a -3 limitation for No Figured. [And every DEX drain also drains OCV and DCV, like it used to, and also drains SPD]

 

+30 EGO adds +10 mOCV (30) and +10 mDCV (30), so 90/1.25 = 72. If we tack on 1/5 Ego as Mental Defense, that’s 96/1.25 = 76.8. Drop mDCV to 2 and it’s 86/1.25 = 68.8. No great breakpoints. Let’s add mental defense, leave mDCV at 3 (so 96/1.25 = 76.8) and price Ego at +2 for 5 points. Limitation for No Figured is -1.5.

 

If we also allow the same “No Figured” on Adjustment powers that target the primary only, I think we’re done! Mind you, accounting for adjustment powers not limited in this fashion during combat may be pretty painful.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I don't think Killing Attacks were nerfed...the 1D3 stun multiple actually puts them in line with Normal Damage attacks as to how much stun damage they can cause at maximum.

 

Figured Characteristics and COM on the other hand, I like and don't want them decoupled (or removed in the case of COM). One of the primary reasons I haven't upgraded to 6th fully. I never had a problem with the 5th edition (even before Revised) so I see no reason to convert my campaigns over.

 

 

Ditto and they can provide 1000s of cost analysis and it won't change my preferences one bit.

 

On killing attacks,Personally although, I've abandoned the killing attack mechanic entirely instead using well placed instances of the piercing advantage from APG. ( but that's another discussion)

[Christopher]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I found a rules legal way to keep Figured characteristics, and not have it unbalanced in the extreme.

 

First let me say that I always felt (and still do) that they were the balancing factor on Elemental Controls, which you will notice have been replaced with "Unified Power" as a -1/4 lim'

 

So with that being my design philosiphy, I allow characters who thing is basicaly a type of characteristic (Speed, Strength, smarts, what ever) to use the unified power on other characteristics.

 

So the Flash (A speed based character) can buy some of his Dex, Speed, OCV, DCV, etc...with unified Power. It works well for me

I see only problem relative to figureds:

When you drain Figured Speed: Dex, OCV, DCV and everything else stays the same

When you drain linked Speed: Dex, OCV, DCV and everything else linked goes down.

Of course the downside would be capped, unless you allow them to sell back all their characteristics, to buy it all as power (with the limitation).

 

I can see how it would work for Flash (aside from thinking about remaking Figureds), as a lot of his powers come from the "Speed Force" Dimension/Energy/whatever. So he has a single point of failure like Elemental Projectors.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I see Barrier as easily abused as opposed to inherently flawed. I am not convinced that the new way of doing KAs is perfect but it certainly no longer causes the problems that the old version did, which is why it is generating less column inches.

 

This is great. We are having a meta-discussion

 

I think the fundamental problem with barrier is that, point for point, there almost isn't a way to use it that isn't broken. You can have any number of 60 active point energy blasts that are fair, but almost any 60 active point barrier will range from unbalanced to game-wrecker.

 

the revision to KA has taken them out of the top way of stunning anyone with a shred of CON + DEF to a marginally better way of breaking foci and entangles.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I see only problem relative to figureds:

When you drain Figured Speed: Dex, OCV, DCV and everything else stays the same

When you drain linked Speed: Dex, OCV, DCV and everything else linked goes down.

 

That's why you get a price break. Under the old rule, you paid 3 points for DEX, and got 1 point towards SPD. But Draining 3 points removed 1 DEX and left the SPD intact.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I think the fundamental problem with barrier is that' date=' point for point, there almost isn't a way to use it that isn't broken. You can have any number of 60 active point energy blasts that are fair, but almost any 60 active point barrier will range from unbalanced to game-wrecker.[/quote']

 

60 AP worth of damage reduction or added defenses is pretty powerful too, while 60 AP of Life Support is pretty much impossible. Not every ability should be bought up to 60 AP.

 

Sure, that's a common power level in a multipower. Would you allow an otherwise typical character to slap, say, +20 PD, +20 ED rDEF into his Multipower for phases when he decides not to attack?

[Christopher]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I think the fundamental problem with barrier is that, point for point, there almost isn't a way to use it that isn't broken. You can have any number of 60 active point energy blasts that are fair, but almost any 60 active point barrier will range from unbalanced to game-wrecker.

 

the revision to KA has taken them out of the top way of stunning anyone with a shred of CON + DEF to a marginally better way of breaking foci and entangles.

I don't really see Barrier as that overpwoered. You start with barely enough area to take cover behind. And you ahve to pay the Body/Defenses at Character Level. Using it cost an attack action.

While it is easy to make it impervious to blast, KA's should take it down easily (Barriers, Foci and Entangles are what KA's are there for in Supers games). Letting them go beyond a certain amount of defenses + body (half what is okay for characters?) or combining it with Indirect attacks could indeed become a problem. But that is what the GM is there for...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I don't really see Barrier as that overpwoered. You start with barely enough area to take cover behind. And you ahve to pay the Body/Defenses at Character Level. Using it cost an attack action.

While it is easy to make it impervious to blast, KA's should take it down easily (Barriers, Foci and Entangles are what KA's are there for in Supers games). Letting them go beyond a certain amount of defenses + body (half what is okay for characters?) or combining it with Indirect attacks could indeed become a problem. But that is what the GM is there for...

 

 

This:

 

Englobatron: Barrier 12 PD/12 ED, 17 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick)

Is a perfectly vanilla Barrier for 60 points and if you only ever use it as a way to trap opponents it is still massively more useful than an equivalently priced Entangle.

 

If you limit the Body/DEF to what you could reasonably buy for Entangle, then you can get this:

 

Englobatron: Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick)

For 31 points, a tadge over half what an equivalent Entangle would cost. Yes an entangle will stop the use of many Focii, which Barrier won't, but there really is no comparison when it comes to utility/cost.

 

Aren't you just chuffed pink that we got here from a discussion about the Bell Curve? Welcome back, indeed, RDU Neil!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Also I think we could have quite happily got rid of the Killing attack mechanic altogether and simply used AVAD to create Killing Attacks, which they would have been rather than 'Destruction Attacks'.

 

Discuss.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Also I think we could have quite happily got rid of the Killing attack mechanic altogether and simply used AVAD to create Killing Attacks, which they would have been rather than 'Destruction Attacks'.

 

Discuss.

 

My character has more COM than yours.

[Christopher]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Also I think we could have quite happily got rid of the Killing attack mechanic altogether and simply used AVAD to create Killing Attacks, which they would have been rather than 'Destruction Attacks'.

 

Discuss.

I disagree.

Avad is to allow you to build unusual, not game breaking attacks - poisions, special flashes, transforms, "Mental" Drain (letting the target forget how to use a power), Mental

Flashes (Disabling the Eye-nerves/making a "can't see illusion").

 

Keeping KA as a seperate power allows better Active Point efficiency (better for Frameworks). Also keep in mind that Hero is a generic System. Killing Damage might not be the way to go in Superheroic games. But it is the way for all non-superroic games. Weapons like Swords and Pistols are supposed to be killing, not jsut stunning.

[Escafarc]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

For Heroic level games it helps in preventing the whole all the mooks are knocked out but not dead so do you slit there throats now?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

My character has more COM than yours.

 

Oh you and your Killer Looks!

[Enforcer84]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Oh you and your Killer Looks!

 

*Preen*

[BNakagawa]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I don't really see Barrier as that overpwoered. You start with barely enough area to take cover behind. And you ahve to pay the Body/Defenses at Character Level. Using it cost an attack action.

While it is easy to make it impervious to blast, KA's should take it down easily (Barriers, Foci and Entangles are what KA's are there for in Supers games). Letting them go beyond a certain amount of defenses + body (half what is okay for characters?) or combining it with Indirect attacks could indeed become a problem. But that is what the GM is there for...

 

you just explained my point right there...

[Ndreare]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Barrier is no more broken than skill levels or most other things people complain about.

 

For the same 60 points a character could also buy +20 3 point skill levels on his attack power. Letting him add up to 10DC when attacking tanks or +10 to hit the speedster and +5 DC.

 

In the end a game master and player just have to agree not to be over the top.

 

Yes you could make the small 30 pd, 30 ed 4x2m 9 body barrier in a 75 ap game and cry foul when a gm says no, but you knew it was wrong when you designed it.

For the same reason you do not build the 3d6 entangle AVAD resistant MD. Yes you know you will have more dice than any bad guy, but it just is not done.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Englobatron: Barrier 12 PD/12 ED, 17 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick)

Is a perfectly vanilla Barrier for 60 points and if you only ever use it as a way to trap opponents it is still massively more useful than an equivalently priced Entangle.

 

If you limit the Body/DEF to what you could reasonably buy for Entangle, then you can get this:

 

Englobatron: Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick)

For 31 points, a tadge over half what an equivalent Entangle would cost. Yes an entangle will stop the use of many Focii, which Barrier won't, but there really is no comparison when it comes to utility/cost.

 

An entangle would not permit:

 

- a Teleporting or Desolid character to Teleport inside to take shelter and recover for a moment

- indirect attacks coming back out at you

- the use of the barrier as shelter against exotic attacks (most of which are blocked by the barrier)

- the entangled character having full DCV (and even dodging, come to that)

- a teammate of the entangled character hiding behind the barrier - his teammate still gets DCV, as well as the benefit of barrier defense, and the barrier sticks around after the teammate escapes (teleports, desolid, etc.)

- Tunnelling out (with or without leaving a hole, and maybe still using the barrier for cover)

- pushing the barrier itself as a shield as they charge you (englobing barriers are not attached to the ground), which should also means a flying character can fly away with the barrier.

- a Mentalist turning his head/body to maintain LoS

 

Your Barrier also cannot target a flying opponent - it must be anchored to the ground.

 

Seems to me that Entangle has some advantages after all!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

An entangle would not permit:

 

- a Teleporting or Desolid character to Teleport inside to take shelter and recover for a moment

- indirect attacks coming back out at you

- the use of the barrier as shelter against exotic attacks (most of which are blocked by the barrier)

- the entangled character having full DCV (and even dodging, come to that)

- a teammate of the entangled character hiding behind the barrier - his teammate still gets DCV, as well as the benefit of barrier defense, and the barrier sticks around after the teammate escapes (teleports, desolid, etc.)

- Tunnelling out (with or without leaving a hole, and maybe still using the barrier for cover)

- pushing the barrier itself as a shield as they charge you (englobing barriers are not attached to the ground), which should also means a flying character can fly away with the barrier.

- a Mentalist turning his head/body to maintain LoS

 

Your Barrier also cannot target a flying opponent - it must be anchored to the ground.

 

Seems to me that Entangle has some advantages after all!

 

I know there are differences between Entangle and Barrier, I'm just saying that for the majority of cases, Barrier makes a better entangle than Entangle does. You could have a Barrier MP with a 'Counteracts Indirect' version and an Opaque version for mentalists and it would still be cheaper than Entangle. Yes, there would still be differences but, then, there is nothing to stop you putting Entangle in your MP too, for the rare occasions when it is the superior choice.

 

BTW you were right the first time: englobing barriers are automatically not anchored, so there is nothing to stop you englobing a flier. Yes they can fly away with it, but they can not do a move through on you as barriers can not be used to push things. Balance, apparently.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Barrier is no more broken than skill levels or most other things people complain about.

 

For the same 60 points a character could also buy +20 3 point skill levels on his attack power. Letting him add up to 10DC when attacking tanks or +10 to hit the speedster and +5 DC.

 

In the end a game master and player just have to agree not to be over the top.

 

Yes you could make the small 30 pd, 30 ed 4x2m 9 body barrier in a 75 ap game and cry foul when a gm says no, but you knew it was wrong when you designed it.

For the same reason you do not build the 3d6 entangle AVAD resistant MD. Yes you know you will have more dice than any bad guy, but it just is not done.

 

The difference is that nobody is expected to be allowed to stack 60 points of levels on a 60 point attack power, but everybody expects to be able to throw 60 point powers whenever they feel like it. The 12d6 Blast is more or less the foundation of the Hero System - the measuring stick against which all other powers are scaled.

 

Barrier just spits in the eye of the otherwise universal measuring stick and sticks out like a sore thumb. It is entirely plausible that barrier will be used in a fair and balanced method, but I've yet to see it. Every PC that has ever been brought to the table with a barrier power has ended up being nerfed after one session, and sometimes less than a full session.

[Christopher]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I know there are differences between Entangle and Barrier' date=' I'm just saying that for the majority of cases, Barrier makes a better entangle than Entangle does.[/quote']

APG II, 23: "Since it’s relatively easy to buy a Barrier powerful enough to keep most characters “trapped” in a globe (see 6E 171), the GM may want to consider removing this function from Barrier entirely. Characters who want to englobe targets have to buy a Limited form of Entangle to represent that ability (often in a Multipower with Barrier). This isn’t entirely logical or consistent with common sense, but sometimes the needs of game balance and fair play have to trump “realism.”"

 

The difference is that nobody is expected to be allowed to stack 60 points of levels on a 60 point attack power' date=' but everybody expects to be able to throw 60 point powers whenever they feel like it.[/quote']

Then their error is in thier expectations, not the power.

 

The rules are okay, the price seems fine to make what you see in comics. As usual the error is not in the rules, but the ones not properly applying them.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

APG II' date=' 23: "Since it’s relatively easy to buy a Barrier powerful enough to keep most characters “trapped” in a globe (see 6E 171), the GM may want to consider removing this function from Barrier entirely. Characters who want to englobe targets have to buy a Limited form of Entangle to represent that ability (often in a Multipower with Barrier). This isn’t entirely logical or consistent with common sense, but sometimes the needs of game balance and fair play have to trump “realism.”"[/quote']

 

Official recognition Entangle used to have the ability to form a barrier, and that was taken out (without any cost reduction) and then Barrier was created that could do both. At the same time Force Wall disappeared.

 

I wonder whether we might not be better with a unified power that CAN do both, with a range of adders to, for example, allow you to create an immobile englobing barrier, or an englobing barrier that does not allow the target to move, preventing the sue of some focii, martial arts and such?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

BTW you were right the first time: englobing barriers are automatically not anchored' date=' so there is nothing to stop you englobing a flier. Yes they can fly away with it, but they can not do a move through on you as barriers can not be used to push things. Balance, apparently.[/quote']

 

They are not anchored. That does not mean they can be created off the ground. That was the intent of adding the adder (IIRC - I don't think it was an advantage) that a Barrier could be created without a surface below it. It's not anchored, but it still cannot be created in mid-air without the adder. Non-anchored refers to being able to create a barrier in mid-air being provided.

 

Can you put "counteracts indirect" and "opaque" in a multipower? Sure. Guess right as to when you should use it though. A barrier specifically cannot destroy existing objects, and a barrier already in place is an existing object. An opaque barrier - great, provided that mentalist lacks an enhanced sense to establish line of sight through it. Now the englobed character is even harder to target.

 

You could make it cost END to maintain so you could Dismiss it, but the default is a Barrier that sticks around once created. You can't create a barrier in an existing barrier, so once you englobe your target with a barrier he can attack through, you can't replace it with one he can't. What happens when you try is a GM call - and for any GM that thinks Barrier is overpowered, making the call that it's easy to replace one barrier with another makes little sense.

 

Show us the opaque build and the Blocks Indirect build - how much BOD and Defense do they have? Oh, and you'll also need barriers with hardened and impenetrable defenses, won't you?

[Christopher]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

You could make it cost END to maintain so you could Dismiss it' date=' but the default is a Barrier that sticks around once created.[/quote']

APG I 58 has a 5 poitns Dismissable adder for barrier.

 

You can't create a barrier in an existing barrier' date=' so once you englobe your target with a barrier he can attack through, you can't replace it with one he can't. What happens when you try is a GM call - and for any GM that thinks Barrier is overpowered, making the call that it's easy to replace one barrier with another makes little sense.[/quote']

But you could create one 'around' it.You just need to keep in mind that your initial barrier isn't at the maximum size already, or you could not craete a barrier big enough around it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

They are not anchored. That does not mean they can be created off the ground. That was the intent of adding the adder (IIRC - I don't think it was an advantage) that a Barrier could be created without a surface below it. It's not anchored, but it still cannot be created in mid-air without the adder. Non-anchored refers to being able to create a barrier in mid-air being provided.

 

Can you put "counteracts indirect" and "opaque" in a multipower? Sure. Guess right as to when you should use it though. A barrier specifically cannot destroy existing objects, and a barrier already in place is an existing object. An opaque barrier - great, provided that mentalist lacks an enhanced sense to establish line of sight through it. Now the englobed character is even harder to target.

 

You could make it cost END to maintain so you could Dismiss it, but the default is a Barrier that sticks around once created. You can't create a barrier in an existing barrier, so once you englobe your target with a barrier he can attack through, you can't replace it with one he can't. What happens when you try is a GM call - and for any GM that thinks Barrier is overpowered, making the call that it's easy to replace one barrier with another makes little sense.

 

Show us the opaque build and the Blocks Indirect build - how much BOD and Defense do they have? Oh, and you'll also need barriers with hardened and impenetrable defenses, won't you?

 

 

I don't see why should have to do all the work, but here you go then

 

I'll do it in 60 points, the same as a 6d6/6DEF Entangle, and none of the slots have less than that level of toughness:

 

41 Multipower, 41-point reserve

3f 1) Barrier 7 PD/7 ED, 7 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick) (35 Active Points) 3 END

4f 2) Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Opaque Hearing Group (41 Active Points) 4 END

4f 3) Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Non-Anchored (41 Active Points) 4 END

4f 4) Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Counteracts Indirect (+1/4) (39 Active Points) 4 END

4f 5) Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation (+1/4) (39 Active Points) 4 END

 

60 points exactly, and all the slots cost less than the 6 END that an Entangle would. It would actually be cheaper if I had limited it to 'only form globes' or somesuch, coming in then at 48 points. Yes, there are still things that Entangle can do that this build can't, like trap a 500 foot ravening bugblatter beast (not quite sure where all that webbing came from...) but for the majority of everyday uses it is far superior, and the top one would actually hold most characters for more than a phase. Equally there will be some targets where you need more than one of these to actually stop them, but for the majority of cases, Barrier is superior and/or cheaper.

 

I could have barriers with hardened and impenetrable defences, yes, and it would be cheaper to add those advantages to this as extra slots than to Entangle. I did add in 'can not be escaped with TPort', which is again something the higher base cost of Entangle would really make you pay for.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I'll do it in 60 points, the same as a 6d6/6DEF Entangle, and none of the slots have less than that level of toughness:

 

41 Multipower, 41-point reserve

3f 1) Barrier 7 PD/7 ED, 7 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick) (35 Active Points) 3 END

4f 2) Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Opaque Hearing Group (41 Active Points) 4 END

4f 3) Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Non-Anchored (41 Active Points) 4 END

4f 4) Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Counteracts Indirect (+1/4) (39 Active Points) 4 END

4f 5) Barrier 6 PD/6 ED, 6 BODY (up to 4m long, 2m tall, and 1/2m thick), Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation (+1/4) (39 Active Points) 4 END

 

60 points exactly, and all the slots cost less than the 6 END that an Entangle would. It would actually be cheaper if I had limited it to 'only form globes' or somesuch, coming in then at 48 points. Yes, there are still things that Entangle can do that this build can't, like trap a 500 foot ravening bugblatter beast (not quite sure where all that webbing came from...) but for the majority of everyday uses it is far superior, and the top one would actually hold most characters for more than a phase. Equally there will be some targets where you need more than one of these to actually stop them, but for the majority of cases, Barrier is superior and/or cheaper.

 

Again, however, you must pick the right slot. Another Entangle next phase enhances the first one. Another Barrier does not. I must guess the correct barrier to use the first time. My target can see out of all of the barriers you provide, and any flier cannot be targeted with anything other than a basic 6/6 Barrier, since you must use the non-anchored one against him.

 

I could have barriers with hardened and impenetrable defences' date=' yes, and it would be cheaper to add those advantages to this as extra slots than to Entangle. I did add in 'can not be escaped with TPort', which is again something the higher base cost of Entangle would really make you pay for.[/quote']

 

Why can't the Entangle be a multipower full of entangles, if the barrier can be a multipower full of barriers? Either character can have Detect Best Choice of Advantages for Entangle/Barrier at the same level.

 

I've seen a lot of "entangle the target, then everyone co-ordinate with multiple attacks" (ab)uses suggested in the past. That doesn't work so well when the target still has his full DCV inside the barrier.