Flight based on self telekenesis

[Erkenfresh]

I'm building a character that can use TK to move metals. (Yeah we've all heard this before). I feel like he should have the flight ability to represent him lifting the metals in his own armor around to fly. If he somehow lost this suit of armor or otherwise wouldn't be wearing it, he'd lose this ability. However, he might be able to substitute the armor with a nearby sheet of metal and stand on it and ride it through the air, kind of like Static Shock.

 

I'm considering using a focus limitation to signify this. Since the power of flight doesn't really come from his own armor, it makes sense to use Inobvious. Then again, what if metal he moves glowed as he moved it? Hmmm... then it would be Obvious after all. In any case I think Inaccessible makes sense too. What does the collective Herodom think?

[Christopher]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

Obvious means it is obvious that it provides that power even when not using it. Wings and Power Armor are Obvious Foci for Flight and Resistant Protection Respectively.

 

I am not certain where to put that substitution ability. There is propably a reason he lifts his pwoer armor instead of playing silver surfer. Could it be that substituting has a drawback (like worser Maneuverability or OCV/DCV while using)?

 

When in doubt just call it "Focus of Opportinity" and put at the Value of a OIF. Inaccessible, because it is hard hard to stop hsi flight (you have to take his armor and any large pieces of metal away). Maybe reduce it to -1/4 Value because it is even harder to take away than the Armor.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

I could see this possibly being an OIF, focus of opportunity kind of thing but then it wouldn't be worth -1/2 either since metal is pretty much everywhere (this is in Millenium City). Thinking about the idea of trying to balance on a trash can lid you are TK'ing yourself sounds a bit shaky too. So I might make it where he can only fly while wearing metallic clothing and such. I think in this case a -1/2 focus limitation would be warranted. Take away his armor and he's grounded (though still powerful in other ways).

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

I would go with OIF, metal object of opportunity, and give it a -½ limitation. But not all objects of opportunity are equal, so there would probably be some penalties if the object wasn't entirely suitable, like having to make a DEX roll to stay on that trash can lid when he gets hit or not being able to use both arms if one of them is hanging onto a crowbar to keep himself aloft. If you don't want to deal with that messiness, then you might want to drop the limitation to -¼, especially if he is only rarely out of his armor in which case the limitation comes closer to "Only in Hero ID" than a focus.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

A -1/4 limitation 'Must be standing on or wearing metal' seems about right to me.

[ayinde]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

I would go with veritable limitations 1/4 0 pts. my logic is his default mode is to just lift his armor but its not the only way he can do it

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

Collie makes a good point though, there's not necessarily any need to use a focus limitation. The armor isn't the source of the power, nor is it some expendable component. So maybe it's just a quick and easy custom limitation. I think either -1/4 or -1/2 would be suitable in this situation, but I'll just lean towards -1/4.

[Christopher]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

Collie makes a good point though' date=' there's not necessarily any need to use a focus limitation. The armor isn't the source of the power, nor is it some expendable component. So maybe it's just a quick and easy custom limitation. I think either -1/4 or -1/2 would be suitable in this situation, but I'll just lean towards -1/4.[/quote']

Then take -1/4, correct upwards if the GM makes Ferrous Metals rarer than they should be.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

Ahh, but I am the GM. The player said he wants his character to have a day job as a pipe fitter. I came up with the idea that he could carry his pipe wrench with him and use his metalkenesis to "throw" the wrench at people. If you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a ball!

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

Collie makes a good point though' date=' there's not necessarily any need to use a focus limitation. The armor isn't the source of the power, nor is it some expendable component. So maybe it's just a quick and easy custom limitation. I think either -1/4 or -1/2 would be suitable in this situation, but I'll just lean towards -1/4.[/quote']

 

To be completely honest, though, I am not a huge fan of the 'focus of opportunity' concept in general, so I never use it.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

I used OIF for Carver, a surf-themed telekenetic. He'd normally fly around on his surfboard, but any reasonably stiff material (door, shelf, sheet of plywood) would work as well.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

This is how I did it on this old 5e Magneto clone:

http://www.herocentral.net/herocentral/get/files/premium/Metalminia+%28053007+Revision%29.HTML

 

14 Magnetic Control: Elemental

Control, 36-point powers, (18 Active Points); all slots Physical Manifestation (Must have metal to work with; -1/4)

15 1) FF (15 PD/15 ED), Costs END Only To Activate (+1/4) (37 Active Points) 3

15 2) Flight 10", x8 Noncombat, Reduced Endurance (1/2 END; +1/4) (37 Active Points) 1

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

Cool, makes perfect sense. Thanks!

[Markdoc]

Re: Flight based on self telekenesis

 

To be completely honest' date=' though, I am not a huge fan of the 'focus of opportunity' concept in general, so I [i']never[/i] use it.

 

I on the other hand, love it and use it frequently! It seems to me to model very nicely a lot of powers that are exerted through the environment or loose objects. I think that's a matter of GM taste.

 

As to the limitation, I'd agree with the others: given the ease of finding suitable metal, I'm guessing -1/4 sounds about right.

 

cheers, Mark