VPP discusion

[bigbywolfe]

Re: VPP discusion

 

I think there is a difference between making and actual Multipower in a VPP (which I always understood the rule to not allow) and modifying a VPP to act in a way similar to a MP, which the rules don't disallow, or even really discuss. Steve's answer about building a multipower gadget in a VPP is right ou of the book and falls into the building a MP in a VPP which the rules address. His equating that to the question presented, if it is legal for a VPP to function as an MP in combat but a VPP in regards to the change at base limitation, et cetera, seems to show he either didn't understand the question (which I doubt) or he gave a knee-jerk response pointing to rules that , arguably, don't directly apply to the situation without thinking it through.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP discusion

 

You are way too focused on the "changing slot rules", when there is much more to the difference. Multipower and VPP are two totally different Constructs. Thier entire pricing model is based on very different Asumptions/Starting points.

 

The pricing Scheme for both is by all regards just "Steve Longs best guess". By extension the entire pricing scheme for everything in the book is, but at least the VPP is something still in it's infancy (it's only the second generation). Just because to like to buy the powers cheap, does not means it is balanced.

With the entire pricing for the VPP the asumption was that you either increase your ability to change slots, or decrease. The fact that there is no Limitaiton like "limited Nr. of Slots" in RAW makes it clear. The fact that there is a "only at base" limitation makes that clear. But most importanlty the examples make that clear.

 

Sure you CAN ignore every thought Steve Long has invested in it. But then it's your own problem. The GM can alter the rules as he sees fit (even ignore "can not"'s), but then he is responsible for all that comes from that.

 

 

Are you even having a valid point there? I mean do you really WANT to be unable to throw a batarang while swinging? Do you really want to be unable to Multiattack with Flash and Entangle?

As far as I can tell this could not even a practical build. It could just be a "look how well I can save points" thing, with limited practical gameplay application.

 

 

Aslo note that whenever a power tend to be rarely used, the game tends towards making it a special power:

Senses, Special Defenses, Luck, Extra Limbs, Duplicaiton.

 

My examples so far have been stripped down to the basics to illustrate specific points. I understand how and why of frameworks very well. I wonder about your understanding. I'm sorry if the point of my posts escapes you. Others do not seem to be having any such problems.

 

It appears you are not aware that the framework rules for HERO were around long before Steve Long wrote 5th edition.

Let me show you some text from 6e and 4e(pre-Steve Long) for comparison:

 

6e1 page 402

A character with a Multipower has several different Powers that draw from a common pool of Character Points.

 

6e1 page 409

A character with a Variable Power Pool (“VPP”) establishes a pool of Character Points that he can use to create any power, or any power within a defined group of powers (typically, a set of powers limited to a particular special effect). Think of a VPP as a Multipower that has all of the powers of a certain type or special effect. The character distributes the points in the Pool among whatever powers he wants to have at a given time.

 

vs. pre-Steve Long

 

Hero System 4e page 114

MULTIPOWER

A character with this Power Framework can have several different Powers that draw from a common point reserve (also called a point pool). A Multipower sets up a reserve of Character Points that’s shared among the Multipower slots. Because the points must be shared, not all the Powers in the Multipower can run at full blast at the same time.

 

Hero System 4e page 116

VARIABLE POWER POOLS

A character with this Power Framework can set aside a pool of points that can be used to create any Power with a given special effect. Think of a Variable Power Pool as a Multipower that has all of the Powers of a certain special effect. The points in the Power Pool are distributed among whatever Powers the character wants to have at a given time. The Powers created from the pool must be linked by common special effects.

[Sean Waters]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Hmm, yeah, I agree with everyone: VPPs are too cheap and need to be re-costed. Sheesh, guys, when was the last time we got a consensus like that?

[Sean Waters]

Re: VPP discusion

 

What always makes me laugh about utility belts is how, when you open one pouch, all the others lock down. What kind of a design feature is that?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP discusion

 

What always makes me laugh about utility belts is how' date=' when you open one pouch, all the others lock down. What kind of a design feature is that?[/quote']

 

That's not always true. My 5e version of Batman's Utility Belt has the ability to use 2 VPP slots simultaneously. The sfx being that he has 2 hands.

edit: It did require him to make a skill roll to 'access the pouches' however.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Having 2 hands is a pretty cool SFX if you ask me...

[Sean Waters]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Let's hope he doesn't have extra limbs in one of his pouches. That could get confusing.

[Sean Waters]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Even so it is pretty amusing watching Batman working out whether to take off his flash goggles or his sectional groin armour because he wants to throw a batarang at you. They don't show you that in the comics.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Even so it is pretty amusing watching Batman working out whether to take off his flash goggles or his sectional groin armour because he wants to throw a batarang at you. They don't show you that in the comics.

We're working within a system and on a budget. If you want to write up a 30,000 point Batman with every gadget he has ever used available at the same time, more power to you.

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: VPP discusion

 

I'm pretty sure that Batarangs are bought as a separate power from his power pool with a 14- Burnout roll. They're not even restrainable since he often uses them to cut himself free from entangles, unless he remembered to bring his more reliable Bat Laser Pointer.

[baronspam]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Having thought about this one a bit, I think many of these arguments are looking at this at too fine a level. Its a fairly black and white rule that you can't put MP in VPPs or VPPs in MPs. The purposed design is for all practical purposes functionally identical to a multipower, with the advantage that you can redesign the multiplier back at base. These basic scheme seems to defy the basic "no frameworks inside other frameworks" rule.

 

If I were to design a batman-like character, I think you would build a multipower with his "standard loadout", the things you take every time you leave the cave. Grapple gun, batarang, smoke bombs etc, and then if you want the character to have an ability to "always have the right gadget" through uncanny foresight and great planning, then that is a VPP. It only simulates one or two devices at a time, but that's all you need, as your standard gear is in the MP. But its enough to pull out that rebreather when the Frightening Fshman just robbed first national and jumped into the harbor, or Darkdude has trapped you in his negative light zone, but low and behold you have a mini radar array in your pocket, etc.

[JmOz]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Having thought about this one a bit, I think many of these arguments are looking at this at too fine a level. Its a fairly black and white rule that you can't put MP in VPPs or VPPs in MPs. The purposed design is for all practical purposes functionally identical to a multipower, with the advantage that you can redesign the multiplier back at base. These basic scheme seems to defy the basic "no frameworks inside other frameworks" rule.

 

If I were to design a batman-like character, I think you would build a multipower with his "standard loadout", the things you take every time you leave the cave. Grapple gun, batarang, smoke bombs etc, and then if you want the character to have an ability to "always have the right gadget" through uncanny foresight and great planning, then that is a VPP. It only simulates one or two devices at a time, but that's all you need, as your standard gear is in the MP. But its enough to pull out that rebreather when the Frightening Fshman just robbed first national and jumped into the harbor, or Darkdude has trapped you in his negative light zone, but low and behold you have a mini radar array in your pocket, etc.

 

The problem with this approach is that Batman in your example would pay more points than Weaponmaster (DC villain, can teleport equipment to himself) who has an unlimited amount of equipment he can port to him...

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Having thought about this one a bit' date=' I think many of these arguments are looking at this at too fine a level. Its a fairly black and white rule that you can't put MP in VPPs or VPPs in MPs. The purposed design is for all practical purposes functionally identical to a multipower, with the advantage that you can redesign the multiplier back at base. These basic scheme seems to defy the basic "no frameworks inside other frameworks" rule.

 

If I were to design a batman-like character, I think you would build a multipower with his "standard loadout", the things you take every time you leave the cave. Grapple gun, batarang, smoke bombs etc, and then if you want the character to have an ability to "always have the right gadget" through uncanny foresight and great planning, then that is a VPP. It only simulates one or two devices at a time, but that's all you need, as your standard gear is in the MP. But its enough to pull out that rebreather when the Frightening Fshman just robbed first national and jumped into the harbor, or Darkdude has trapped you in his negative light zone, but low and behold you have a mini radar array in your pocket, etc.

 

I see that you missed or have chose to ignore the text that I quoted earlier.

 

Here it is again:

 

6e1 page 409

A character with a Variable Power Pool (“VPP”) establishes a pool of Character Points that he can use to create any power, or any power within a defined group of powers (typically, a set of powers limited to a particular special effect). Think of a VPP as a Multipower that has all of the powers of a certain type or special effect. The character distributes the points in the Pool among whatever powers he wants to have at a given time.

 

 

 

 

What you are saying is illegal (which is not the case at all) is in the first paragraph of the framework's description!

[casualplayer]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Even so it is pretty amusing watching Batman working out whether to take off his flash goggles or his sectional groin armour because he wants to throw a batarang at you. They don't show you that in the comics.

 

One of the reasons why writing up a utility belt using MP or VPP is a point-shaving abomination IMO.

 

Steve's answer goes back to the ban against nesting power frameworks in other power frameworks. It's needlessly convoluted, and a VPP is already a MP with nigh-infinite slots anyway.

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Besides, everyone knows that the utility belt is really a Dark Champions Equipment Pool that's been bought up at ton.

 

Most of the Bat's points are in Zero End, IPE Telekinesis only to improve carrying capacity.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPP discusion

 

With all due respect to Steve, reference to the "framework in a framework" issue seems to indicate a misunderstanding of the actual question.

 

You are way too focused on the "changing slot rules"' date=' when there is much more to the difference. Multipower and VPP are two totally different Constructs. Thier entire pricing model is based on very different Asumptions/Starting points.[/quote']

 

If we make the VPP Cosmic (0 phase to change slots; no skill roll to change slots) we effectively have a multipower with unlimited slots, with a slight mechanical variance in the impact of limitations on the slots. So I think the "changing slot" rules are probably the most substantive difference between a VPP and a Multipower.

 

The pricing Scheme for both is by all regards just "Steve Longs best guess". By extension the entire pricing scheme for everything in the book is' date=' but at least the VPP is something still in it's infancy (it's only the second generation).[/quote']

 

It's been around since 3rd edition. That makes it fourth generation, and it has been through nowhere near the changes many other constructs have been through.

 

Just because to like to buy the powers cheap' date=' does not means it is balanced[/u'].

With the entire pricing for the VPP the asumption was that you either increase your ability to change slots, or decrease. The fact that there is no Limitaiton like "limited Nr. of Slots" in RAW makes it clear. The fact that there is a "only at base" limitation makes that clear. But most importanlty the examples make that clear.

 

For 30 points (pool) + 30 points x 3 = 90, so a total of 120, we can have a VPP which can have any power, or number of powers, of up to 60 AP, with a 30 real point maximum available at any point in time. The slots can be changed at will. This could be a BatBlaster that switches between a 12d6 Blast, 4d6 RKA, 12d6 Sight Flash, etc. at will (with at least -1 limitations, probably an OAF). It could be a Summon WhirlyBat Remote Control. It could be +10 rPD/=10rED with no limitations at all.

 

If the VPP is less versatile, it should cost less. If all powers must have a -1/2 or greater Focus, we get a -1/2 limitation on the control cost, saving 30 points. And if we can only have 12 slots available to choose from at any time, that seems considerably less versatile than being able to swap between an infinite number of slots at will. How much less versatile would determine the appropriate limitation. Feels like -1/2, as 12 slots is a pretty wide array of choices, but is it really that wide compared to an infinite number of choices? A lot is being given up.

 

A 30 point MP with 12 slots, all Variable, would cost 102 points, mighty close to that 120 point VPP with no limitations. Maybe the Multipower is overpriced. Given a VPP is just a big Multipower, there is clearly a breakpoint at which the VPP is more cost-effective. There are other suggestions in the game that this is enough that it should be considered "unlimited", and here that is at the breakpoint where the VPP is the same price.

 

Sure you CAN ignore every thought Steve Long has invested in it. But then it's your own problem. The GM can alter the rules as he sees fit (even ignore "can not"'s)' date=' but then he is responsible for all that comes from that.[/quote']

 

We can also reasonably extrapolate from what is written. For 90 points, the 30 Real Point, 60 AP, Cosmic VPP which must have -1/2 in limitations from Focus can be constructed and Batman can pull any gadget he wants, at any time, from that Utility Belt within those point parameters. That's perfectly book legal. Hyper Man is suggesting that reducing the choices from "infinite" to "12 pre-selected slots" seems to reduce flexibility enough to justify a further cost break. That's what "Limited Power" is for. But the most he needs to pay is 90 points - even if he self-imposes the "12 pre-selected slots" limit, that's what it costs with no such limitation.

 

Are you even having a valid point there? I mean do you really WANT to be unable to throw a batarang while swinging? Do you really want to be unable to Multiattack with Flash and Entangle?

 

Whatever is in the belt is limited. If you want the Batarang available at all times, you build to that goal. If you need two hands to fire the Entangle, you can't toss a Flash Grenade at the same time, however much you might want to. If you want two devices at a time, you need a bigger pool.

 

ADDENDUM: Didn't Steve write up the first "official" Hero System utility belt in Dark Champions? That was, as I recall, a Multipower.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP discusion

 

One of the reasons why writing up a utility belt using MP or VPP is a point-shaving abomination IMO.

 

Steve's answer goes back to the ban against nesting power frameworks in other power frameworks. It's needlessly convoluted, and a VPP is already a MP with nigh-infinite slots anyway.

 

So you don't like Frameworks with Limitations. Nothing wrong with that. But why even post on this thread then?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Perhaps... Perhaps not....

 

Anyway, here is an example of what I think the rule was designed to prevent (for good reason).

 

45 Swiss Army Powers: Variable Power Pool (Gadget Pool), 30 base + 30 control cost

0 1) See Below*: Custom Power (30 Active Points) Real Cost: 30

20

Below:

Multipower, 30-point reserve, (30 Active Points); all slots OIF (-1/2)

2f

1)

He's A Flasher: Sight Group Flash 4d6, Area Of Effect (32m Radius Explosion; +1/2) (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), 4 clips of 8 Charges (-0) - END=[8]

2f

2)

He's A Swinger!: Swinging 40m, x8 Noncombat (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) - END=[6 rc]

2f

3)

He's A Blaster: Blast 6d6 (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) - END=[6 rc]

2f

4)

He's A Hitter!: Hand-To-Hand Attack +4d6, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/4) - END=0

2f

5)

He's A Roper!: Entangle 2d6, 4 PD/4 ED (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) - END=[6 rc]

 

The total real cost of the "Below" Multipower is 30 points and without the quoted rule in place it could theoretically be taken as 'whole cloth' as a slot within the "Swiss Army VPP" above it (which does NOT have either of the Cosmic Advantages: No Skill Roll & 0 Phase to Change). Since "Below" is a single "Slot" within the VPP neither of those Advantages would be required to switch between the 5 Multipower slots because a "Multipower" does not need them.

 

Preventing that bit of munchkinery is the only valid reason I see for the rule. Does anyone else have a different example that justifies the RAW?

 

Does anyone else find it ironic that the example given by Steve in his first response is a version of my example above?

I can certainly see situations where as GM I would allow a character to build a Multipower-based gadget in a VPP -- for example, an energy pistol with multiple settings

 

The ONLY way I would allow an "energy pistol with multiple settings" within a VPP that lacks the "Cosmic" Advantages would be to use Variable Advantage to simulate the effect.

 

Example:

60 Gadget Pool: Variable Power Pool (Gadget Pool), 30 base + 60 control cost

30 Energy Pistol: Blast 6d6, Variable Advantage (+1/2 Advantages; Limited Group of Advantages; Area Of Effect Accurate 4m Radius, No Range Modifier, Armor Piercing x2 & Affect Desolidified; +3/4) (60 Active Points); OAF (-1), 4 clips of 16 Charges (+1/4) - END=[16]

 

Note that the VPP still requires a skill roll and full Phase to change slots but the "Energy Pistol" could still use any of the 4 "multiple settings" without actually changing the VPP allocation & without resorting to the illegal by RAW nesting framework within a framework. This method also enforces a maximum of 6d6 Blast on the "Energy Pistol" where a nested Multipower of the same active points could be higher (8-10d6 would be my guess) with a slot with no Advantages.

[casualplayer]

Re: VPP discusion

 

So you don't like Frameworks with Limitations. Nothing wrong with that. But why even post on this thread then?

 

It's not that I don't like Frameworks with Limitations; it's that I don't like non-sensical character design. If your character concept is carrying gear then the character should be built so that just about any and all variations of using that gear should be possible. Like Sean Waters said, I shouldn't have to put my night vision goggles away so that I can use my rebreather and tear gas pellets if my SFX is a utility belt. It's a point-conserving design rather than a power-modeling one. If your Swiss Army Powers gadgeteer character can't half-move swing and throw a gadgeteerarang at a bad guy, is this really the character you intended to make? If the character can't use its swingline, smoke pellets and uv goggles simultaneously, is this really the character you intended to make?

 

It's alright. I lost this battle years and years ago when Steve Long himself started publishing characters with "Whatever Weapon/Device I Happen to be Using" MPs. Very efficient right up until the point where you realize you actually built a Bag of Holding with improbable inventory and an arbitrary cap on how many items you can withdraw.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP discusion

 

... It's a point-conserving design rather than a power-modeling one...

 

I don't believe there has to be a choice between one or the other.

 

My versions of Batman (both for 5e and 6e) that use a Limited VPP to model his Utility Belt are starting versions of the character. Furthermore, my 5e version CAN use 2 different Utility Belt abilities simultaneously. Of course all modeling difficulties are solved by just throwing more points at them. But that just feeds into the old complaints against HERO (it's too cumbersome; Batman can't be built on less than 1000 points; etc...). Modeling starting versions of established comic characters is by design going to be lacking in details when compared to current comic versions that are not 'reboot' oriented. There is nothing to prevent their use as PC's in a game and allowing XP to be used to get their abilities more in line with their mature comic counterparts.

[Christopher]

Re: VPP discusion

 

Does anyone else find it ironic that the example given by Steve in his first response is a version of my example above?

How I see that working:

M16-Style Energy Assault Rifle:

60 Points Multipower; all Slots Unified (-0*)

6u Singel Shot: 10d6 Blast plus +2 OCV

4u 3-shot Burst: 12d6 Blast, Multiple Shots (-1/2**)

4u Autofire: 8d6 Blast, Autofire (5 Shot; +1/2***), Multiple Shots (-1/2***)

Total: 74 Character Points

 

There might still be room for a 4th slot, the "grenadelauncher"

*I think it needs this at no limtation value or negative adjustment powers would be seriously hampered against this multipower as a VPP slot.

**that simualtes that his one Attack is actually 3 Bullets. So it will cost 3 Charges or three times Single Shot Endurance (3x5 = 15)

***technically around 10-15 blasts leave the barrel, but making every 2-3 Shots into one "part" of the Autofire makes these number more manageable and usefull. Again, every shot takes multiple charges.

 

In you 80/40 VPP you then put:

M-16 Style Energy Assautl Rifle, 74 AP; OAF (-1*), 37 Real Cost

 

Note that this pwoer fullfills a 80 AP Power Limit and a 12 DC Limit at the same time.

 

*I've put the OAF here as I would generally delay all Limitaitons that affect the entire MP into the VPP. Otherwise we might affect the AP of this construct to much to let it still be balanced. A 12 DC, 3 mode assault rifles should not ever fit into a 40 Controll VPP.

 

It's not that I don't like Frameworks with Limitations; it's that I don't like non-sensical character design. If your character concept is carrying gear then the character should be built so that just about any and all variations of using that gear should be possible. Like Sean Waters said' date=' I shouldn't have to put my night vision goggles away so that I can use my rebreather and tear gas pellets if my SFX is a utility belt. It's a point-conserving design rather than a power-modeling one. If your Swiss Army Powers gadgeteer character can't half-move swing and throw a gadgeteerarang at a bad guy, is this really the character you intended to make? If the character can't use its swingline, smoke pellets and uv goggles simultaneously, is this really the character you intended to make.[/quote']

I have had good results makign a small VPP for things like Binoculars, Rebreathers and the like. Even a 10/10 VPP can help a lot.

 

It's been around since 3rd edition. That makes it fourth generation' date=' and it has been through nowhere near the changes many other constructs have been through.[/quote']

The best guess about the time for 3E I have is "around 1989".

So people have actually been thinking about the VPP (as part of thier job, not hobby) for about as long as I have been on this planet.

Yet you asume they never had the same idea as Hyperman. So there can't be the possibility that they thought the answer that Steve Long gave is actually thought through?

 

For 30 points (pool) + 30 points x 3 = 90' date=' so a total of 120, we can have a VPP which can have any power, or number of powers, of up to 60 AP, with a 30 real point maximum available at any point in time. The slots can be changed at will. This could be a BatBlaster that switches between a 12d6 Blast, 4d6 RKA, 12d6 Sight Flash, etc. at will (with at least -1 limitations, probably an OAF). It could be a Summon WhirlyBat Remote Control. It could be +10 rPD/=10rED with no limitations at all.[/quote']

You asume that all VPP's with Cosmic (+2) will be balanced.

But even after 3 Editions the VPP is still a Stop-Sign power. That says to me: "We don't know if it will be balanced, see for yourself GM" - about a base VPP. When there is no guarantee that a base VPP is balanced, how can you say a Cosmic VPP is? If the Comisc isn't absolutely balanced, how can you say with certinity that a Cosmic VPP with Limitations is?

 

But that just feeds into the old complaints against HERO (it's too cumbersome; Batman can't be built on less than 1000 points; etc...).

That is more of an issue what people write down. About 25%-50% of what any long established characters shows in thier series can be explained with:

Power Skill Roll or Plot device.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPP discusion

 

The best guess about the time for 3E I have is "around 1989".

So people have actually been thinking about the VPP (as part of thier job, not hobby) for about as long as I have been on this planet.

Yet you asume they never had the same idea as Hyperman. So there can't be the possibility that they thought the answer that Steve Long gave is actually thought through?

 

No, I see no indication in the rules that HM's idea is prohibited. If he removes the "no more than 12 slots available at any given time", this becomes a plain vanilla VPP. Being less limited does not make it more balanced.

 

You asume that all VPP's with Cosmic (+2) will be balanced.

But even after 3 Editions the VPP is still a Stop-Sign power. That says to me: "We don't know if it will be balanced, see for yourself GM" - about a base VPP. When there is no guarantee that a base VPP is balanced, how can you say a Cosmic VPP is? If the Comisc isn't absolutely balanced, how can you say with certinity that a Cosmic VPP with Limitations is?

 

We need to start with a baseline. If your assumption is that a basic cosmic VPP is unbalanced, variations will logically also be unbalanced. Is it MORE or LESS balanced if the available slots at any given time are restricted than if they are unlimited? That is the sole item that has been vetoed in the rules forum.

[Christopher]

Re: VPP discusion

 

No' date=' I see no indication in the rules that HM's idea is prohibited.[/quote']

You mean aside from the builds and limitations that deal with exactly his built?

 

We need to start with a baseline. If your assumption is that a basic cosmic VPP is unbalanced' date=' variations will logically also be unbalanced. Is it MORE or LESS balanced if the available slots at any given time are restricted than if they are unlimited? That is the sole item that has been vetoed in the rules forum.[/quote']

Is a limitation that is only there to allow balance, worth any extra point saving?

Also, how much of this Limitation is actually "Gadget based SFX only" (a form of Limited power selection)?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP discusion

 

How I see that working:

M16-Style Energy Assault Rifle:

60 Points Multipower; all Slots Unified (-0*)

6u Singel Shot: 10d6 Blast plus +2 OCV

4u 3-shot Burst: 12d6 Blast, Multiple Shots (-1/2**)

4u Autofire: 8d6 Blast, Autofire (5 Shot; +1/2***), Multiple Shots (-1/2***)

Total: 74 Character Points

 

There might still be room for a 4th slot, the "grenadelauncher"

*I think it needs this at no limtation value or negative adjustment powers would be seriously hampered against this multipower as a VPP slot.

**that simualtes that his one Attack is actually 3 Bullets. So it will cost 3 Charges or three times Single Shot Endurance (3x5 = 15)

***technically around 10-15 blasts leave the barrel, but making every 2-3 Shots into one "part" of the Autofire makes these number more manageable and usefull. Again, every shot takes multiple charges.

 

In you 80/40 VPP you then put:

M-16 Style Energy Assautl Rifle, 74 AP; OAF (-1*), 37 Real Cost

 

Note that this pwoer fullfills a 80 AP Power Limit and a 12 DC Limit at the same time.

 

*I've put the OAF here as I would generally delay all Limitaitons that affect the entire MP into the VPP. Otherwise we might affect the AP of this construct to much to let it still be balanced. A 12 DC, 3 mode assault rifles should not ever fit into a 40 Controll VPP.

....

 

Christopher, was there a point you were trying to make with this example?

The only one I can discern is a lack of basic understanding on your part with regard to what the Pool and Control represent in a VPP (your example should read 40/80, not the other way around).

The Control cost is what defines the maximum Active Points of any abilities within the VPP. It costs 1 point per 2 points of Control before Modifiers (Advantages & Limitations).

The Pool cost is what defines the maximum total of Real Cost of all active abilities.

 

Regardless, you referenced my previous post but didn't comment at all about the ramifications I raised about Steve's initial response and the relevant text in 6e1.

Did you not see the paradox? Or do you just choose to ignore its existence?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPP discusion

 

You mean aside from the builds and limitations that deal with exactly his built?

 

The only aspect of HM's build that isn't pulled directly from RAW is the limit of 12 slots available at any one time, which must be changed back at base. His build was:

 

37 The Utility Belt: Variable Power Pool (Gadget Pool), 15 base + 30 control cost, No Skill Roll Required (+1), Powers Can Be Changed As A Zero-Phase Action (+1) (60 Active Points); Slightly Limited Class of Powers Available (Gadgets) Power loses about a fourth of its effectiveness (from 6e1 page 410; -1/4), Operates As A Multipower Of ~ Dozen Different Slots Power - does not work in Uncommon Circumstances (Once Set, What Slots Are "Carried" Can Only Be Changed At Batcave; -1/4); all slots Restrainable (-1/2) <--- This is the ONLY Common Limitation to the Slots & the Control Cost

 

He could instead build

 

40 The Universal Utility Belt: Variable Power Pool (Gadget Pool), 15 base + 30 control cost, No Skill Roll Required (+1), Powers Can Be Changed As A Zero-Phase Action (+1) (60 Active Points); Slightly Limited Class of Powers Available (Gadgets) Power loses about a fourth of its effectiveness (from 6e1 page 410; -1/4), all slots Restrainable (-1/2) <--- This is the ONLY Common Limitation to the Slots & the Control Cost

 

Now he can pull anything he wants out of the Utility Belt. He has unlimited slots. He can make them up as he goes along. Lucky I packed the Bat Shark Repellent! He spends 3 points for this added flexibility.

 

Now maybe YOU don't like the Cosmic VPP - but it is clearly in the RAW that it can be constructed as above. If you find it unbalancing, it's your prerogative to disallow it in your game - the Stop Sign even notes it can be unbalancing. But, by RAW, the Unlimited Slot Utility Belt costs 40 points. I'd say restricting it to 12 slots at any given time is a pretty significant restriction - the pool loses much of its versatility. Is that only a -1/4 limitation? I think it's probably higher. But even if you decide it's a -0, the build itself remains legal.

 

I see the logic of -1/4, in that only being able to change at base at all is -1/2. However, it seems much more limiting of the Cosmic advantages.

 

Is a limitation that is only there to allow balance' date=' worth any extra point saving?[/quote']

 

If reducing the flexibility is, in your view, the only way to make it balanced, then you are saying the base power is too much for your game, and you want it toned down. Isn't "toning it down" reducing its value? That is limiting the power from what it could otherwise do.

 

If you come to my 12 DC limit game with a 15d6 MegaBlast and I say "no, it must be reduced to 12d6 for balance", would you not expect to get back the points from the extra 3d6? If I decide I'll accept the 15d6, despite being in excess of campaign norms, but only if it costs 3x END, would you not expect to get back the points from that limitation? Remember, both changes are "only there to allow balance".

 

In fact, by requiring the ability be limited to 12 slots which can only be changed back at base, aren't you SAYING that this is limiting, as you find the construct unbalancing before and balanced afterwards?

 

Also' date=' how much of this Limitation is actually "Gadget based SFX only" (a form of Limited power selection)?[/quote']

 

In my game, I would expect a summary of the things it can do, and the things it can't do, and decide how much of a limitation is appropriate from that listing. Given "magic" is -1/4, "gadgets" seems at least as limiting. But I question whether "magic" should be -1/4. But, again, we are only arguing values. If we make "limited choices that can only be modified at base" and "gadgets only" -0 limitations, we get a total cost of 45, so for 8 points, both limitations are -0. But if they are TRULY -0, then I should be able to have the full VPP versatility (with all powers being Restrainable), and not be restricted to a choice of 12 gadgets. If you classify these as -0 limitations, then you are indicating that these restrictions are hardly limiting at all, so this is almost the same as an unlimited VPP.