Can be used as...

[Doc Samson]

Re: Can be used as...

 

1) Buy the advantage avld (def resistance) on the TK and special effect is "killing attack"

 

This. In 6e, Attack Versus Alternate Defense Can allow TK to do Killing damage. If you don't want to do Killing damage all the time buy it as a Naked Advantage or through a Variable Advantage.

[Christopher]

Re: Can be used as...

 

Of course you are right. I meant Uncontrolled' date=' not Persistant. My bad.[/quote']

Even that would still mean you have only so many phases. And afaik you ahve to use it unconrtolled to begin with, you can't just switch (wihtout affectign the target once more).

 

This. In 6e' date=' Attack Versus Alternate Defense Can allow TK to do Killing damage. If you don't want to do Killing damage all the time buy it as a Naked Advantage or through a Variable Advantage.[/quote']

Little Problem is: When you have AVAD (Normal Defense to Resistant Defense; +1/2) you also need Does Body (+1) to do body damage.

[Ndreare]

Re: Can be used as...

 

A tk only cosmic VPP would only cost the same as +3/4 advantage and would let you use what you need when you need it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Can be used as...

 

So we have:

 

1. Buy both.

 

If we have 60 points in TK that means it can do an 40 STR/8DC attack and that would mean a 2 1/2d6 KA, which is going to cost 100 points in total.

 

2. Buy TK with AVAD.

 

Interesting idea, costing 90 points (60 in TK and then +1/2 for the AVAD (very common to common)), although that does not work quite the same way as a Killing Attack.

 

3. Buy an uncontrolled KA to allow it to be used at the same time as TK even though they can go into a MP together.

 

Also an interesting idea, but I think it has problems in that you can attack then grab with TK but not the other way around, which is an important consideration.

[Ndreare]

Re: Can be used as...

 

With unified power discount the killing attack an tk combined would only be 80 points. Which paying effectivly 20 points for a 40 AP killing attack.

 

Example

40 STR Tk = 60 points

 

40 STR TK, unified = 48 points

2-1/2D Killing, unified = 32 points

Total only 80 points

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Can be used as...

 

The cheaper the player builts a power (AP wise)' date=' the less endurance it will cost. But it will also be easier to attack by drains/supresses. The player knows this and can build accordingly.[/quote']

 

100 meters Teleport, Megascale to 1km. 200 AP

 

1 meter Teleport, Megascale to 100 km. 2.5 AP - call it 3. Spend 97 points on Power Defense and you're still up 100 points.

 

Regardign the "not seeing sheets". I don't would put it beyond Tony Starks abilities to guess the stopping power (amoutn of dice) or Limitations on a Weapon (it only has 4 charges with that energy source) after seeing it used once. Character and Player are officially entiteled to know Limitations like Side Effect or Extra Endurance cost.

 

The character knows that this power has a nasty backfire and that one is more tiring. He does not know that the side effect does 3d6 normal stun, or costs 15 END, nor does he know how many Stun Points and END Points he has.

 

There is no reason his opponent can see the side effect (unless the side effect itself is visible) or the extra END being spent.

 

The same way I would not put it beyond the abilities of a teleporter or magician to figure out that this teleport power/teleport spell would be vulnerable for a little bit of CE (that wouldn't stop or even hinder the combat teleport).

 

Should the magician know what would stop the Enterprise's transporters? Should Scotty know what would prevent a magical spell functioning? I think not. YMMV.

 

I would say they switched the "transport Platform" Multipower from one slot with High Megascale' date=' to one with lower Megascale (but a more robust amount base meters) or even down to one with only combat movement (the version where they have to fly-by to get through). This also explains why the beamup time can varry so strongly (sometimes it's Megascale wiht it's extra time, sometimes not).[/quote']

 

Why would you pay for both slots when you can scale your Megascale? Slap Difficult to Dispel on that 1 meter 390 times and it costs 100 points. Good luck with that Suppression Field!

[Lucius]

Re: Can be used as...

 

So we have:

 

1. Buy both.

 

If we have 60 points in TK that means it can do an 40 STR/8DC attack and that would mean a 2 1/2d6 KA,

 

No it doesn't

 

which is going to cost 100 points in total.

.

 

No it won't Although it will cost more than I expected. Just worked it up in Hero Designer.

 

Grab 'em: Telekinesis (40 STR) (60 Active Points); Unified Power (-1/4) 48 Real

 

Stab 'em: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6 (1 1/2d6 w/TK), Ranged (+1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Increased Maximum Range (600m; +1/2), Indirect (Source Point is the same for every use, path can change with every use; +3/4) (49 Active Points); Unified Power (-1/4) 39 Real

 

What's expensive is all the Advantages to make it work like Telekinesis; Range, Indirect, and Increased Range to match that of the first power. Then again, I forgot to add Linked....also, you may want to go ahead and pay END on it.

 

Less expensive:

 

Stab 'em on the cheap: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1 point (1d6 w/TK), Ranged (+1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Indirect (Source Point is the same for every use, path can change with every use; +3/4), Increased Maximum Range (800m; +1) (19 Active Points); Unified Power (-1/4) 15 Real

 

but that doesn't do the damage equivalent of 40 STR Normal. If you're willing to pay 2 END, the Real Cost is 13.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Unified Palindromedary

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Can be used as...

 

Points 1 & 2 are correct but not #3.

STR does not add to a Martial Killing Strike in 5e or 6e.

 

I'm pretty sure in the 5ed that STR added to Martial Killing Strike. The FAQ answer you posted later was specifically in regard to adding damage to weapons, not adding STR to the damage of Martial Killing attacks. STR adds to killing damage martial arts attacks as normal. In the 5th and earlier editions though, one could no more than double the base damage class of the maneuver, so the basic Martial killing strike starting at 2DC (1/2D6K) could not be increased to more than 4DC (1D6+1k). However, purchasing Extra DC for your martial art added the extra DC as base damage for the purpose of your martial killing strike, so +2 extra DC for your martial art added +1DC to the base damage of your martial killing strike (from 2DC to 3DC) enabling your character to max that damage at 6DC (2D6k) instead of merely 4DC.

 

Maybe this was changed in the 6ed. I haven't read HERO SYSTEM MARTIAL ARTS yet, so I don't know. But in the 5th edition and previous, STR did add to killing damage martial arts attacks.

 

Be aware also that I do not read the FAQ much, as I don't need it. So if this was changed in the FAQ, I am unaware, nor do I care.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Can be used as...

 

After scanning this thread, the best solution I've come to is to not allow Sean to use TK.

 

It's elegant, simple, and requires no math.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Can be used as...

 

After scanning this thread, the best solution I've come to is to not allow Sean to use TK.

 

It's elegant, simple, and requires no math.

 

Can I be the first to say that, while an elegant solution, this would be cruel and unusual punishment.

 

I love the fact that Sean plays this game, he asks questions of the rules that provoke discussion and that is the reason I come here - the discussions.

[Ndreare]

Re: Can be used as...

 

After scanning this thread, the best solution I've come to is to not allow Sean to use TK.

 

It's elegant, simple, and requires no math.

 

The solution is so elegant it should have been codified in the original rules. ;-)

[Christopher]

Re: Can be used as...

 

100 meters Teleport, Megascale to 1km. 200 AP

 

1 meter Teleport, Megascale to 100 km. 2.5 AP - call it 3. Spend 97 points on Power Defense and you're still up 100 points.

CE (-1m Teleport Movement) Area of Effect.

 

The character knows that this power has a nasty backfire and that one is more tiring. He does not know that the side effect does 3d6 normal stun, or costs 15 END, nor does he know how many Stun Points and END Points he has.

 

There is no reason his opponent can see the side effect (unless the side effect itself is visible) or the extra END being spent.

The rules strongly disagree on that:

"However, unless the GM rules otherwise, a character who can perceive a Power can determine the following about it".

[...]

"the Source Effect: the effect of the Power on the character or object using it, if any (e.g., he’s suffering painful “feedback” [in game terms, the power has a Side Effect], he’s becoming tired as he maintains it [it’s a Constant Power that costs END])"

6E1 125

 

When you complete ignore this, then of course player/characters in your games and games that you would play in can't percieve/learn any of the stuff, they have a rigth to know.

 

Should the magician know what would stop the Enterprise's transporters? Should Scotty know what would prevent a magical spell functioning? I think not. YMMV.

I gave the "magic teleport to magician", "technical power to tech guy" example. So it has nothing to do with this expressions. So this his nothing to do with what I said.

 

Why would you pay for both slots when you can scale your Megascale? Slap Difficult to Dispel on that 1 meter 390 times and it costs 100 points. Good luck with that Suppression Field!

Teleport Inhibitor:

CE (-1m Teleport Movement) Area of Effect.

 

That is the why. Like I said for about 6 times by now.

 

 

Regarding the original Problem:

Telekinetik Martial Arts

Free Weapon Element: Telekinesis

4 Killing Strike

Maneuvers for 6 points at choosing of the player

 

The TK rules say you can use Tk to Grab, Stike and "any maneuvers you paid poitns for". Then goes on to give MA as example.

 

 

Alternatively use:

15 +1D6 HTH-Attack, Works with TK not Normal STR (+0)

 

Of course you could go down to +1 Pip of Killing Damage if yo prefer to ahve the smaler price.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Can be used as...

 

CE (-1m Teleport Movement) Area of Effect.

 

And, again, I come back to the massive illogic that someone would somehow *know* that this power will stop Character A teleporting to and from from Alpha Cenatauri buit will hardly hinder a character whose teleportation is barely enough to cross the street. If we want a mechanics war, however, spend some of the points you saved on a massive Suppress CE field (limited to CE that reduces teleportation) and the rest on power defense that only protects your teleportation. Or buy 2" of Teleport with the same Megascale for 5 points.

 

Or just recognize that, if it is the GM's goal to prevent you Teleporting out, he has unlimited points with which to achieve that goal. If he does not want to allow such a power, then he should disallow it, not let the player spend the points, however many or however few, and then create constructs designed to prevent that power ever being useful.

 

As well, I would expect you to be able to explain how this CE Device inhibits, even ever so slightly, every possible form of teleportation (including constructs like "How Did He Get There?". I can see the basis for "he can teleport massive distances" much more easily.

 

The rules strongly disagree on that:

 

"However, unless the GM rules otherwise, a character who can perceive a Power can determine the following about it".

[...]

"the Source Effect: the effect of the Power on the character or object using it, if any (e.g., he’s suffering painful “feedback” [in game terms, the power has a Side Effect], he’s becoming tired as he maintains it [it’s a Constant Power that costs END])"

6E1 125

 

When you complete ignore this, then of course player/characters in your games and games that you would play in can't percieve/learn any of the stuff, they have a rigth to know.

 

When you completely ignore context, you get inappropriate results.

 

Throughout the discussion of Sensing Powers, we have numerous caveats such as "it's up to the GM to interpret...based on special effects, common sense, dramatic sense, game balance and other factors". That doesn't sound like "strong disagreement" to anything.

 

Let's begin with page 124, which tells us that powers are obvious, inobvious or invisible. Movement powers are Inobvious, although they are typically Obvious when in use. This is set out on p 126, and also mentioned on p 124. Change Environment is an Attack Power, so it is always Obvious. You can tell someone is firing a gun, or that they have moved. However, as page 125 begins, "The appearance of a Power depends on its special effect, not what Power it is", and "appearance alone doesn't distinguish one Power from another".

 

The specifics of "What's Perceived" are, I note, offered "As a general guideline", which again seems to rebut your presumption that the rules "strongly disagree". I note that intensity is perceivable, but not game mechanics (how many dice or Active points is not known, but it's usually obvious that a Blast 12d6 is stronger or more powerful than a Blast 8d6). I note the word "usually", which again is inconsistent with your claim of "strong disagreement".

 

I also note that the example does not provide any guidance on how one perceives less clear cut differences. For example, whether a 10d6 AP Blast is perceived as more or less powerful than an 11d6 Blast. The difference between sufficient Megascale to fly at supersonic speeds, or enough raw flight to travel at supersonic speed, seems a very subtle difference. My common sense tells me that measuring the speed is objective, so the fact the character is travelling a 3x the speed of sound is all that can really be perceived, not how many meters of base movement allow the character that supersonic speed. Finally, this item is noted as "approximate", so that's another caveat following those already provided.

 

I note we can tell "he is suffering painful feedback" with the mechanic of Side Effect indicated. It does not say that one can perceive whether the power has a side effect, but rather that the special effect of a side effect ("he's suffering painful feedback") is perceptible. That could also result from a CE that inflicts damage on anyone in the area when they use an attack power, as it is special effects, and not the mechanics themselves, which are perceptible. I doubt anyone would argue the fact that the Sword of Bleakness has a Side Effect that gradually makes its wielder paranoid and homocidal is visibly obvious with each sword thrust. Rather, we will have to perceive the change in outlook, and assess for ourselves what may have caused it. We see "he's becoming tired as he maintains it", but not whether he is becoming tired because the power costs 1/2 END, full END, double END or has an END Draining side effect.

 

And look - the discussion on p 125 closes with yet another admonition that the determination of what can be perceived should be "based on common sense, dramatic sense, game balance and other factors". That doesn't strike me as consistent with indicating these are in any way hard and fast rules. Quite the opposite, great care has been taken to indicate they are general guidelines whose application is expected to vary broadly.

 

I gave the "magic teleport to magician"' date=' "technical power to tech guy" example. So it has nothing to do with this expressions. So this his nothing to do with what I said.[/quote']

 

So how does Tech Guy know to develop a 1 meter CE against Magician? Again, I come back to the SFX of powers. CE also has SFX. So explain why the Teleport Inhibitor impacts magical, technological and superskill teleportation, precludes teleportation to Alpha Centauri, but not across the street, and makes SuperSkill Man's "How did he get there" Superskill less effective?

 

Ultimately, if I perceive a "cheese factor" to 1 meter movement with large Megascale modifiers (and there is some - I would allow this in some games, but not in others), I can't reasonably claim that the "cheese factor" to 1 meter movement suppression is not significantly greater.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Can be used as...

 

CE (-1m Teleport Movement) Area of Effect.

 

And, again, I come back to the massive illogic that someone would somehow *know* that this power will stop Character A teleporting to and from from Alpha Cenatauri buit will hardly hinder a character whose teleportation is barely enough to cross the street. If we want a mechanics war, however, spend some of the points you saved on a massive Suppress CE field (limited to CE that reduces teleportation) and the rest on power defense that only protects your teleportation. Or buy 2" of Teleport with the same Megascale for 5 points.

 

Or just recognize that, if it is the GM's goal to prevent you Teleporting out, he has unlimited points with which to achieve that goal. If he does not want to allow such a power, then he should disallow it, not let the player spend the points, however many or however few, and then create constructs designed to prevent that power ever being useful.

 

As well, I would expect you to be able to explain how this CE Device inhibits, even ever so slightly, every possible form of teleportation (including constructs like "How Did He Get There?". I can see the basis for "he can teleport massive distances" much more easily.

 

The rules strongly disagree on that:

 

"However, unless the GM rules otherwise, a character who can perceive a Power can determine the following about it".

[...]

"the Source Effect: the effect of the Power on the character or object using it, if any (e.g., he’s suffering painful “feedback” [in game terms, the power has a Side Effect], he’s becoming tired as he maintains it [it’s a Constant Power that costs END])"

6E1 125

 

When you complete ignore this, then of course player/characters in your games and games that you would play in can't percieve/learn any of the stuff, they have a rigth to know.

 

When you completely ignore context, you get inappropriate results.

 

Throughout the discussion of Sensing Powers, we have numerous caveats such as "it's up to the GM to interpret...based on special effects, common sense, dramatic sense, game balance and other factors". That doesn't sound like "strong disagreement" to anything.

 

Let's begin with page 124, which tells us that powers are obvious, inobvious or invisible. Movement powers are Inobvious, although they are typically Obvious when in use. This is set out on p 126, and also mentioned on p 124. Change Environment is an Attack Power, so it is always Obvious. You can tell someone is firing a gun, or that they have moved. However, as page 125 begins, "The appearance of a Power depends on its special effect, not what Power it is", and "appearance alone doesn't distinguish one Power from another".

 

The specifics of "What's Perceived" are, I note, offered "As a general guideline", which again seems to rebut your presumption that the rules "strongly disagree". I note that intensity is perceivable, but not game mechanics (how many dice or Active points is not known, but it's usually obvious that a Blast 12d6 is stronger or more powerful than a Blast 8d6). I note the word "usually", which again is inconsistent with your claim of "strong disagreement".

 

I also note that the example does not provide any guidance on how one perceives less clear cut differences. For example, whether a 10d6 AP Blast is perceived as more or less powerful than an 11d6 Blast. The difference between sufficient Megascale to fly at supersonic speeds, or enough raw flight to travel at supersonic speed, seems a very subtle difference. My common sense tells me that measuring the speed is objective, so the fact the character is travelling a 3x the speed of sound is all that can really be perceived, not how many meters of base movement allow the character that supersonic speed. Finally, this item is noted as "approximate", so that's another caveat following those already provided.

 

I note we can tell "he is suffering painful feedback" with the mechanic of Side Effect indicated. It does not say that one can perceive whether the power has a side effect, but rather that the special effect of a side effect ("he's suffering painful feedback") is perceptible. That could also result from a CE that inflicts damage on anyone in the area when they use an attack power, as it is special effects, and not the mechanics themselves, which are perceptible. I doubt anyone would argue the fact that the Sword of Bleakness has a Side Effect that gradually makes its wielder paranoid and homocidal is visibly obvious with each sword thrust. Rather, we will have to perceive the change in outlook, and assess for ourselves what may have caused it. We see "he's becoming tired as he maintains it", but not whether he is becoming tired because the power costs 1/2 END, full END, double END or has an END Draining side effect.

 

And look - the discussion on p 125 closes with yet another admonition that the determination of what can be perceived should be "based on common sense, dramatic sense, game balance and other factors". That doesn't strike me as consistent with indicating these are in any way hard and fast rules. Quite the opposite, great care has been taken to indicate they are general guidelines whose application is expected to vary broadly.

 

I gave the "magic teleport to magician"' date=' "technical power to tech guy" example. So it has nothing to do with this expressions. So this his nothing to do with what I said.[/quote']

 

So how does Tech Guy know to develop a 1 meter CE against Magician? Again, I come back to the SFX of powers. CE also has SFX. So explain why the Teleport Inhibitor impacts magical, technological and superskill teleportation, precludes teleportation to Alpha Centauri, but not across the street, and makes SuperSkill Man's "How did he get there" Superskill less effective?

 

Ultimately, if I perceive a "cheese factor" to 1 meter movement with large Megascale modifiers (and there is some - I would allow this in some games, but not in others), I can't reasonably claim that the "cheese factor" to 1 meter movement suppression is not significantly greater.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Can be used as...

 

Sean, sorry to derail your thread. Maybe we should talk about using TK as a KA on another thread - the Megascale one seems to have gone pretty quiet

 

I wonder whether my personal favorite "systems logic versus SFX logic" issue comes into play here. If we didn't have HKA, which is enhanced by STR, and claws were purchased as a generic Killing Attack, with No Range applied, and Swords were built as 1 1/2d6 KA + 1 1/2d6 KA, only to the extent user exerts 5 STR for each added DC, would we be so eager to allow TK to be used as a killing attack, rather than a normal attack?

 

We don't complain that flames bought as a Blast don't have the option to do killing damage, or that Sand Powers don't get an automatic Blinding effect as the sand gets in your eyes.

 

We have an optional combat maneuver, Club Weapon, to allow normal damage to be done with a weapon that usually does killing damage. Perhaps a maneuver which would permit an attack which does normal damage to instead inflict killing damage should be considered. I question whether it should be the simplistic "no change to OCV or DCV and get the same DC's" model used by Club Weapon, but perhaps that maneuver should be similarly revisited so killing attacks aren't automatically multipowers of killing and normal damage.

[Markdoc]

Re: Can be used as...

 

After scanning this thread, the best solution I've come to is to not allow Sean to use TK.

 

It's elegant, simple, and requires no math.

 

While the elegant simplicity of this solution appeals, I think Sean had the correct approach in his first post: make an MP big enough to include both attacks. The utility of being able to grab an opponent, hold them grabbed (thus inflicting significant penalties on them) and then stab them at the same time sounds very much worth the extra points, and far beyond the sort of benefit you should expect from a crummy +1/4 advantage.

 

It allows you to lift them into the air and stab them - thus forcing them to use an action on breaking free instead of counter-attacking, negating defences which are OAFs like shields, inflicting the grabbed penalty on their OCV - thus making them easier to stab, preventing them from using movement to take cover or simply get away, and in the event they do break free, potentially augmenting your stabbing damage with falling damage.

 

And that's just the most basic grab-and-stab. It doesn't include things like holding-them-down-in-lava-and-stabbing-them-just-for-effect or using-them-as-a-sheld-and-stabbing-them-at-the-same-time or any one of a dozen other maneuvers that the crowd awards you bonus points for.

 

To me the suggested advantage looks suspiciously like "I want to have multiple attack, but I don't actually want to pay for it" - though I suspect in this case, that wasn't Sean's actual intent

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: Can be used as...

 

We have an optional combat maneuver' date=' Club Weapon, to allow normal damage to be done with a weapon that usually does killing damage. Perhaps a maneuver which would permit an attack which does normal damage to instead inflict killing damage should be considered. I question whether it should be the simplistic "no change to OCV or DCV and get the same DC's" model used by Club Weapon, but perhaps that maneuver should be similarly revisited so killing attacks aren't automatically multipowers of killing and normal damage.[/quote']

 

As an aside, I always inflict the unfamiliarity (-3 OCV) penalty on using a weapon to inflict a different kind of damage than it was intended to: a sword or an axe is not a club, and doesn't actually function well like one. Someone who wishes to specialise in that sort of swap-damage can of course buy al evel to cover it, but most people don't seem to bother.

 

cheers, Mark

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Can be used as...

 

As an aside' date=' I always inflict the unfamiliarity (-3 OCV) penalty on using a weapon to inflict a different kind of damage than it was intended to: a sword or an axe is not a club, and doesn't actually function well like one. Someone who wishes to specialise in that sort of swap-damage can of course buy al evel to cover it, but most people don't seem to bother.[/quote']

 

That would seem a very reasonable solution. A 3 point penalty is significant, and the unfamiliarity of using the ability in a manner it is not typically used fits very well. Elegant - but I appear to have Repp'ed you too recently!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Can be used as...

 

After scanning this thread, the best solution I've come to is to not allow Sean to use TK.

 

It's elegant, simple, and requires no math.

 

 

...actually I'm working on a Blast-only solution using controlled knockback...er...

[Lucius]

Re: Can be used as...

 

While the elegant simplicity of this solution appeals, I think Sean had the correct approach in his first post: make an MP big enough to include both attacks. The utility of being able to grab an opponent, hold them grabbed (thus inflicting significant penalties on them) and then stab them at the same time sounds very much worth the extra points, and far beyond the sort of benefit you should expect from a crummy +1/4 advantage.

 

It allows you to lift them into the air and stab them - thus forcing them to use an action on breaking free instead of counter-attacking, negating defences which are OAFs like shields, inflicting the grabbed penalty on their OCV - thus making them easier to stab, preventing them from using movement to take cover or simply get away, and in the event they do break free, potentially augmenting your stabbing damage with falling damage.

 

And that's just the most basic grab-and-stab. It doesn't include things like holding-them-down-in-lava-and-stabbing-them-just-for-effect or using-them-as-a-sheld-and-stabbing-them-at-the-same-time or any one of a dozen other maneuvers that the crowd awards you bonus points for.

 

To me the suggested advantage looks suspiciously like "I want to have multiple attack, but I don't actually want to pay for it" - though I suspect in this case, that wasn't Sean's actual intent

 

cheers, Mark

 

Advantage: Can Be Abused As....

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Can be abused by a palindromedary. and the palindromedary gets away with it as long as Lucius doesn't notice the tagline.....

[Lucius]

Re: Can be used as...

 

After scanning this thread, the best solution I've come to is to not allow Sean to use TK.

 

It's elegant, simple, and requires no math.

 

Better: Not allow Sean to use Hero System

 

I keep teling you guys, it's HIS fault the system has gotten so complex and big and unwieldy! He's why 6th Edition will stop TWO bullets!

 

Lucius Alexander

 

You can't blame the palindromedary for that

[Christopher]

Re: Can be used as...

 

And' date=' again, I come back to the massive illogic that someone would somehow *know* that this power will stop Character A teleporting to and from from Alpha Cenatauri buit will hardly hinder a character whose teleportation is barely enough to cross the street.[/quote']

Are you willing to bet that no teleporting Hero in comics ever said: "There is somethign hindering my teleports. I can still move in line of sight, but I cannot get us to the surface/outside"? I am dead certain there was such a scene or maybe even multiple scenes in the history of comic books.

 

When you completely ignore context, you get inappropriate results.

 

Throughout the discussion of Sensing Powers, we have numerous caveats such as "it's up to the GM to interpret...based on special effects, common sense, dramatic sense, game balance and other factors". That doesn't sound like "strong disagreement" to anything.

I this case we have a clear: "They know, unless the GM has a good reason to do otherwise". Not a "they know nothing, unless the GM feels otherwise". The rules clearly favor the side of the heroes/players knowing those things.

 

Heroes guessing or knowing the enemies weakness is what happens all the time in comics. They often talk open about the limitations of the others power in character and exploit it to win. In order to archive similar scenes, your players need to know that so they can let their heroes use this and get to the part where they tell the enemy the obvious flaw. The Rules about what is percieved were for me obviously written to allow exaclty those scenes.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Can be used as...

 

Are you willing to bet that no teleporting Hero in comics ever said: "There is somethign hindering my teleports. I can still move in line of sight' date=' but I cannot get us to the surface/outside"? I am dead certain there was such a scene or maybe even multiple scenes in the history of comic books.[/quote']

 

Am I willing to bet there is no such scene? No - that's a ton of ground to cover. Why don't you find a really good example where the scene is well-written, and the teleport block is something that cannot be explained by a Barrier that stops Teleportation as or more readily than a CE designed to exploit a flaw in a 1 meter Megascale construct.

 

I this case we have a clear: "They know' date=' unless the GM has a good reason to do otherwise". Not a "they know nothing, unless the GM feels otherwise". The rules clearly favor the side of the heroes/players knowing those things.[/quote']

 

If all we had was "unless the GM rules otherwise" or, alternatively, "with GM permission you can take another approach", I would agree. The two pages together could be reduced to one if we removed the numerous references to the application of special effects, common sense, dramatic sense, game balance and other factors, and similar clarifications that these are general guidelines, not rules.

 

Heroes guessing or knowing the enemies weakness is what happens all the time in comics. They often talk open about the limitations of the others power in character and exploit it to win. In order to archive similar scenes' date=' your players need to know that so they can let their heroes use this and get to the part where they tell the enemy the obvious flaw. The Rules about what is percieved were for me obviously written to allow exaclty those scenes.[/quote']

 

Seems to me that just as many comics have heroes who are not clearly aware of these obvious flaws. An old Avengers annual, for example, where the Vision takes advantage of Doc Spectrum's weakness, then comments on the fact that villains find it difficult to understand heroes share knowledge, rather than commenting on how he could see that Doc Spectrum would be helpless against ultraviolet light from analyzing his energy constructs. The special effects of specific abilities, coupled with common and dramatic sense, would lead to the conclusion that, sometimes, the weaknesses would be obvious, sometimes they would be perceivable with effort and sometimes they would be undetectable and require detective work to unearth. Which. to me, is a much more accurate recreation of the comics in general.

 

Let's consider the Termite, an old Iron Man villain. After some scrapping and skirmishing with this villain who easily tunneled through rock and earth, Iron Man corners him, grabs his gauntlets, rips them off and crushes them, then smugly flies away leaving him for the authorities to collect.

 

 

Whereupon Termite makes some comment about IM's smug arrogance, and proceeds to tunnel away, being as he is a mutant and does not use technology to access or augment his powers in any way whatsoever.

 

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Can be used as...

 

To me the suggested advantage looks suspiciously like "I want to have multiple attack' date=' but I don't actually want to pay for it[/i']" - though I suspect in this case, that wasn't Sean's actual intent

 

There is also the fact that it is possible, with no advantage, to use TK to grab someone and, while holding them, create another TK to do damage to the person currently immobilised. Multiple attack with one power as long as END paid for.

 

If it is possible to use it to do normal damage then why not killing damage. That is the conundrum...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Can be used as...

 

There is also the fact that it is possible' date=' with no advantage, to use TK to grab someone and, while holding them, create another TK to do damage to the person currently immobilised. Multiple attack with one power as long as END paid for.[/quote']

 

Or you could Squeeze them with the same STR used to Grab them. That's already in the rules.

 

If it is possible to use it to do normal damage then why not killing damage. That is the conundrum...

 

But would we so eagerly question why not Flash damage ( "I poke him in the eye/box his ears/pinch his nose with my TK"), Drain damage ("I bruise him/hamstring him with my TK") or whatever other form of damage? No other power gets to choose between two types of damage - why should TK be an exception? And, if it should be, why should the other type of damage be restricted to killing? Why not NND ("I squeeze the air from his lungs") or AP ("I shape my TK into little pointy bits to get past his defenses")?