Bodyguards of Love

[evilaustintom]

I'll probably post the PC I've been working on in a later email (as an FYI, this deals with Aphrodite, goddess of love), but I have one 'power' she has, and how I'm building it. I wanted to get people's opinions on it - how it looks, what looks wrong, how to do it better...I'm up for any thoughts on it.

 

First, the 'real world' description of the power (or series of powers that works together for one effect). The character is gorgeous - supernaturally so, in fact. She is so beautiful, that men will fling themselves in the way of her attackers to protect her. In response to hurling their bodies in the way of the attack, they become furious with the attacker for 'daring to attack the goddess'.

 

Mechanically, she causes nearby allies and those in love with her to move (up to half of their speed), in the way of the attack. They will even push her aside, if that will help protect her. They take the brunt of the attack, and become angry with the attacker (and may become enraged if it happens again). However, their anger fuels their attacks back at the original attacker (hence the aid to OCV vs that attacker).

 

The two big issues I'm considering are:

 

1. The Link Limitation. They're all linked to the original triggering effect, but I'm not sure if it is really warranted. I could pick the most expensive power in the bunch, and use that as the 'main power', but that's not how the whole thing works - it's all dependent on the ally moving to protect her. In any case, mechanically I can still go with the link limitation - just at half the value.

 

2. The Trigger-Usable On Others-Trigger. You can do naked advantages with the DMs approval, but this is a weird one. It's an advantage (Trigger) with another advantage on it (usable on others), and is triggered itself (Trigger again). So it's an advantage with two advantages of it's own. I can't do just 1 trigger and usable on others, because the attacker causes her power to go off, which gives the ally an immediate move (which, itself, needs to have the same trigger - otherwise the ally couldn't move outside of his normal turn).

 

In any case, let me list everything, so you can see for yourself...

 

2 – Bodyguards of Love Naked Advantage: Trigger Usable On Others with its own Trigger [when Aphrodite is attacked], based on 20 active pts of recipient’s movement (or ½ of his move, whichever is less), see ‘Base Power Effects’ for more info…

1^st Trigger (+½ one condition, character does not control activation of personal trigger, trigger resets automatically, –½ ally or love must be nearby, – ¼ OIAID)

Usable on Others (+¼ recipient controls power, but grantor can take it back, can only grant to others, limited range [10 hexes], –1 only works on men, –½ recipient must be aware of attack on Aphrodite, – ¼ OIAID)

2^nd Trigger (+½ one condition, character does not control activation of personal trigger, trigger resets automatically, –½ ally or someone in love with her must be nearby, – ¼ OIAID)

Base Power Effect: recipient moves between attacker and Aphrodite to stop or lessen the attack, which has linked effects:

15 – Physical Damage Negation x9 (–¼ linked to triggered move power, –1½ side effect [negated damage always affects ally], – ¼ OIAID)

15 – Energy Damage Negation x9 (–¼ linked to triggered move power, –1½ side effect [negated damage always affects ally], – ¼ OIAID)

3 – Flash Defense 10 (–¼ linked to triggered move power, –1½ side effect [negated effect always affects ally], – ¼ OIAID)

8 – Power Defense 25 (–¼ linked to triggered move power, –1½ side effect [negated effect always affects ally], – ¼ OIAID)

5 – DCV +3 (–¼ linked to triggered move power, –1½ side effect [attack that misses due to this adjustment always affects ally], – ¼ OIAID)

1 – Triggered 2m [1 hex] of Aphrodite’s own movement (+½ one condition [when ally/love moves Aphrodite out of way of attack], activating the trigger is an action that takes no time, trigger resets automatically, – ¼ OIAID)

9 – Focused Wrath Aid 3d6 to OCV of ally/love that tried to shield me (+½ trigger [one condition, , character does not control activation of personal trigger, auto-reset], +½ 0 End, +¼ limited ranged, –½ only to aid others, –1 men only, –½ side effect [recipient always gains: psych complication “Hatred of Attacker” {Very Common, Strong}, and “Berserk” if Aphrodite attacked again {8-/14- easy to avoid and recover}, –1½ OCV bump only to assist in attacking focus of new psych complication, – ¼ OIAID)

 

Total Cost: 58 pts

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

Fascinating

 

I like the idea, although I might raise an eyebrow at the -1 1/2 for the side effect limitation: I appreciate that it is technically legal, but it does seem to be a bit of a hefty limitation given that it does not really harm the characcter, other than possibly reducing the number os 'shield' candidates. Moreover I always raise an eyebrow at linking greater powers to lesser powers - and triggered move powers as defences are always a bit prickly anyway.

 

Finally there is nothing - at least nothing here - to encourage allies to actually participate; the genius is that there does not NEED to be: if they are nearby they take the damage instead of her and she gets the powers. That is going to make her mighty unpopular...especially as side effects ignore defences as far as i am aware: her 'allies' will fall like wheat.

 

Still, like I said, fascinating, and an interesting example of the many things you can do with hero and a little lateral thinking...

[evilaustintom]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

Fascinating

 

I like the idea, although I might raise an eyebrow at the -1 1/2 for the side effect limitation: I appreciate that it is technically legal, but it does seem to be a bit of a hefty limitation given that it does not really harm the characcter, other than possibly reducing the number os 'shield' candidates. Moreover I always raise an eyebrow at linking greater powers to lesser powers - and triggered move powers as defences are always a bit prickly anyway.

 

Finally there is nothing - at least nothing here - to encourage allies to actually participate; the genius is that there does not NEED to be: if they are nearby they take the damage instead of her and she gets the powers. That is going to make her mighty unpopular...especially as side effects ignore defences as far as i am aware: her 'allies' will fall like wheat.

 

Still, like I said, fascinating, and an interesting example of the many things you can do with hero and a little lateral thinking...

 

On the side effect limitation, I looked at it this way: -1 limitation for the value of the side effect itself, then -1/4 for affecting 'ally' rather than the -1/2 for affecting the environment around the main character. Finally, double the value for the side effect always happening (so from -3/4 to -1 1/2).

 

I agree with you about the 'linking greater to lesser powers' thing. At least it's not a huge savings, since the other limitations do most of the discount. As mentioned, I could change it to make one of the more expensive powers the 'main power' - but then the side effect of that is that all the other powers get a -1/2 rather than -1/4, potentially a bigger cost savings (I haven't done the math on that, and perhaps I should - I was simply going with how the power worked).

 

It's true, there is nothing here that MAKES the allies take this power (other than the measly 3d6 aid to OCV to the ally). The triggers are all mandatory, but the 'usable on allies' advantage needs to be willing - so they could turn it down (and rightly so). However, the character herself will have other powers to alter emotions, which may cover that. Plus, a high PRE and attractiveness and some RPing, I might be able to swing it. Of course, I'm a big guy in person, trying to role-play a goddess of love - I might get dinged a penalty to my presence attacks for that.

 

One thing you mentioned, though...side effects always ignore all defenses? Hrm, I hadn't thought of that. I wasn't looking to completely wipe out my allies (or my 'altered' enemies). When I build the power, I decided to go with damage negation rather than PD/ED, thinking that it would stop the damage from ever being delivered, and the ally would take the hit like they normally would if THEY were being attacked. Causing, say, some ultra-tough brick with 40 resistant PD to suddenly go down from the bad guy's pistol shot seems unfair to the player running the brick. Hrm.

 

If you use the limitation on the side effect limitation 'affects only environment around character', would the side effect ignore the PD/ED of the environment? So a 1d6 killing attack could destroy the heavily-fortified door? I would think the environment's resistances would still apply - and hence, using an ally as a shield should allow him to use his own defenses...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

TECHNICALLY they can not turn it down, and do not need to be willing as built: they just need to be nearby and allies. The only real problem, well, the only real technical problem, is that the power implies that the allies move, but it is only an implication and not actually necessary - it could all be sfx.

 

As to side effects v environments destroying that armoured door with a paltry 1d6 killing attack, why yes. Mind you, if I was the GM, by this stage I'd need to get a couple of other friends round so that I had enough eyebrows to raise. The rules are clear enough though -

 

6.1.395

No Defense Applies

Any Side Effect automatically affects the character

(or environment or recipient) — no Attack

Roll is necessary. The character, environment,

or recipient gets no defenses against the Side

Effect — not even if he’s Desolidified or otherwise

protected from that form of damage under ordinary

circumstances.

[evilaustintom]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

Concerning willingness of ally - perhaps I should put in a limitation "receipient must be willing to accept power". -1/2? -1/4? Under Limited or Conditional power limitations.

 

Concerning the use of defenses by the ally...perhaps 'side effect' is not the best advantage to use with this, then. I could use 'deflect' with ranged powers, but that wouldn't help with AoE attacks.

 

Ah, how about this...I could go with variable limitation, and define the limitation as 'create a matching power of that being blocked, and affect recipient as side effect, but only at half strength'...no, that's still under the 'side effect' limitation, plus would be harder to figure out a value to the limitation. Hrm.

 

Just spit-balling. I may need to ponder a bit more - how to have another attack power affect an adjacent (or nearby) ally, but work as a normal attack (with normal defenses applying)...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

I like the idea, and you COULD take an even more lateral thinking approach and have a Speed Aid Field around you.

 

Eh?

 

The idea is that anyone near you gains extra SPD but that SPD is limited so that it can only be used to take defensive actions on your behalf: the brick can leap to interpose himself between you and an attack, or yank you out of the way or whatever: the choice to do so remains with your allies, of course, but this gives them the opportunity to defend you without losing actions of their own - and they get full defences!

 

You could even build yourself some limited defences, as above, that only click in when someone does act to defend you (Damange Negation would not need trigger - it is constant - but could take a limitation "Only when someone acts to defend me", probably worth -1 too) - the trouble is going to be that without the whapping Side Effect limitation none of this will be desperately cheap. I might give you -1 on the SPD boost though as it does not affect you and can only be used for limtied purposes (NB you do not need to make it selective as even villains COULD act to protect you, if they were so minded).

[evilaustintom]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

The speed aid aura is an idea, but I think a bit prohibitive practically. First, the active cost of the power (speed's not cheap). Then the practical side of rolling aid dice every turn, for everyone to refigure their speed, and only for 'dodging into the way' seems a bit action intensive. I think I prefer the constant status effect of 'triggered movement that auto-resets' just for this effect. It ends up being easier to manage in-game, and doesn't additionally penalize the ally (ie: player) of potentially giving up their next action.

 

Speaking of dodging in the way - is there a regular mechanic where a PC can 'take the hit' for an ally? ie: give him cover, and if the attack misses the target because of the cover, it hits the bocking ally? If so, where? That might be an option to look into. If that works, then I can use the adjusted penalty to the defense as you suggested (-1, as long as ally defends/blocks the attack). I could even put a minor side effect in that effect, where the ally will take a bit of the effect, regardless of whether it hit/miss (the minimum for side effects)...

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

I believe Dive for Cover can be used that way, to intentionally dive into an attack meant for another instead of out of an attack's way.

[Christopher]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

How about building these "Bodyguards" as summons?

She just has always some (replaceable) meatshields around.

This would not affect allies, but instead you had extra character that "take the punch". I would go from the "normal person" powervalue, but upgrade them a bit (more OCV and DEX/Quick reflexes) to simulate that they are determiend to protect her.

 

Of course the entire power raises morality questions - how can an PC hero come to terms that random strangers throw themself into the way of attacks that could harm a superhero of her powerlevel?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

Not necessarily THAT expensive:

 

Love Gives you Wings: Boost SPEED 3 1/2d6 (standard effect: 10 points), Area Of Effect (8m Radius; +1/2), Constant (+1/2) (42 Active Points); Costs Endurance (to maintain; -1/2), Limited Power Power loses less than a fourth of its effectiveness (SPD only useable to take actions to protect Aphrodite; -0) 42 active 28 real

 

That should Aid everyone in an 8m radius of you, you don't need to use an action to maintain it as it is constant and the points do not fade so long as you keep paying END. The first phase someone is in the field they gain +1 SPD, the seconf phase they gain another +1 SPD, which is the maximum. OK, it is still a bit of an administrative problem with all the SPD changes, but it is doable.

[Christopher]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

That should Aid everyone in an 8m radius of you' date=' you don't need to use an action to maintain it as it is constant and the points do not fade so long as you keep paying END. The first phase someone is in the field they gain +1 SPD, the seconf phase they gain another +1 SPD, which is the maximum. OK, it is still a bit of an administrative problem with all the SPD changes, but it is doable.[/quote']

Not quite. When you use Standart effect, the Standart effect is also the maximum effect. 1 SPD is all you get.

[bneumeier]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

Not quite. When you use Standart effect' date=' the Standart effect is also the maximum effect. 1 SPD is all you get.[/quote']

 

Erm, not quite. When you use Standard Effect, the effect you have on any given use of the powers is standardized to be 3 points per d6. This does nothing to change the maximum effect of Aid; it just means that it will always take exactly two uses of the power to reach that maximum effect.

 

(Unless you can find a FAQ entry or post in the HERO System 6th Edition Rules Questions forum that says so...? But I can't.)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

Erm, not quite. When you use Standard Effect, the effect you have on any given use of the powers is standardized to be 3 points per d6. This does nothing to change the maximum effect of Aid; it just means that it will always take exactly two uses of the power to reach that maximum effect.

 

(Unless you can find a FAQ entry or post in the HERO System 6th Edition Rules Questions forum that says so...? But I can't.)

 

That is certainly my understanding.

[Christopher]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

That is certainly my understanding.

As was mine, until I read this:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/87230-Standard-Effect-Rule-Aid-and-Maximum-Effect

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

Weird. I thought that only applied to Healing since you couldn't "roll higher" to heal more, didn't remember it applied to all (positive) Adjustment Powers.

[evilaustintom]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

How about building these "Bodyguards" as summons?

She just has always some (replaceable) meatshields around.

This would not affect allies, but instead you had extra character that "take the punch". I would go from the "normal person" powervalue, but upgrade them a bit (more OCV and DEX/Quick reflexes) to simulate that they are determiend to protect her.

 

Of course the entire power raises morality questions - how can an PC hero come to terms that random strangers throw themself into the way of attacks that could harm a superhero of her powerlevel?

 

I've already got a summons in the build - she is a goddess, after all.

 

As to the whole morality thing, traditionally in myth, many gods are vain. Aphrodite should be no exception.

 

I hadn't thought about the Standard Effect rule. That would make it simpler...but I still think I like the triggered move better. Also, if a PC decides to do it, that keeps him from giving up his next action. I might want to put a limitation on it, though - no character should be able to leap into the way of an attack more than once per one of his phases. Otherwise, you'll potentially have one tough guy leapfrogging around me in the battle multiple times in a segment.

 

I think I've got the power tweaked enough that I can post the character. I ended up going with a minor side effect - ally who blocks attack takes 1d6 of damage/effect. So it's not killer, but still affects the blocker (like a glancing blow).

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

As was mine, until I read this:

www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/87230-Standard-Effect-Rule-Aid-and-Maximum-Effect

 

 

Thank you for pointing that out, Christopher, so that I can immediately place it on the 'rules I will be ignoring' list. That is a massive nerf to Aid that makes no sense as far as I can see. Standard Effect already reduces the average roll, which is fine as you are getting consistency, but to halve the maximum effect too is, well, daft.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

I've already got a summons in the build - she is a goddess, after all.

 

As to the whole morality thing, traditionally in myth, many gods are vain. Aphrodite should be no exception.

 

I hadn't thought about the Standard Effect rule. That would make it simpler...but I still think I like the triggered move better. Also, if a PC decides to do it, that keeps him from giving up his next action. I might want to put a limitation on it, though - no character should be able to leap into the way of an attack more than once per one of his phases. Otherwise, you'll potentially have one tough guy leapfrogging around me in the battle multiple times in a segment.

 

I think I've got the power tweaked enough that I can post the character. I ended up going with a minor side effect - ally who blocks attack takes 1d6 of damage/effect. So it's not killer, but still affects the blocker (like a glancing blow).

 

 

Cool - interesting discussion!

[Christopher]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

I think I've got the power tweaked enough that I can post the character. I ended up going with a minor side effect - ally who blocks attack takes 1d6 of damage/effect. So it's not killer' date=' but still affects the blocker (like a glancing blow).[/quote']

this 1d6 has a 4:6 chance to deal 1 Body. 1:6 to deal 2. And no defenses are allowed against side effects.

 

Thank you for pointing that out' date=' Christopher, so that I can immediately place it on the 'rules I will be ignoring' list. That is a massive nerf to Aid that makes no sense as far as I can see. Standard Effect already reduces the average roll, which is fine as you are getting consistency, but to halve the maximum effect too is, well, daft.[/quote']

I interpret SE rule differently. You replace the entire roll with a guaranteed effect.

It is less than an averag roll. (2d6=7, 6/36 Chance)

It is certainly less than an exceptional roll. (2d6=8+, 15/36 Chance)

But most importantly: It is more or equal to any sub-average roll (2d6=6-, 15/36 Chance)

[evilaustintom]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

this 1d6 has a 4:6 chance to deal 1 Body. 1:6 to deal 2. And no defenses are allowed against side effects...

 

Right. Assuming it's not a killing attack, of course...or a transform, flash, drain, etc.

[Christopher]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

Right. Assuming it's not a killing attack' date=' of course...or a transform, flash, drain, etc.[/quote']

1d6 KA, Drain and (relevant) transform cost more than 5 points of 1d6 Blast.

[evilaustintom]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

1d6 KA' date=' Drain and (relevant) transform cost more than 5 points of 1d6 Blast.[/quote']I realize that. I'm sorry - are trying to make a point? Rr, that sounded rude. What I mean to say is, are you going somewhere with this? Nah, still not polite. (sigh). What I'm saying is that you've been pointing out rules that many of us know. Are you looking to support an argument or theory? Posting rules without any sort of opinion leaves me wondering if you have a problem with this. Do you think it's too nasty to the bodyguard? Do you think something else?

[Christopher]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

I realize that. I'm sorry - are trying to make a point? Rr' date=' that sounded rude. What I mean to say is, are you going somewhere with this? Nah, still not polite. (sigh). What I'm saying is that you've been pointing out rules that many of us know. Are you looking to support an argument or theory? Posting rules without any sort of opinion leaves me wondering if you have a problem with this. Do you think it's too nasty to the bodyguard? Do you think something else?[/quote']

After over a week I am not certain what my points was

 

It certainly means the side effect is bigger. But It also means the side effect is more dangerous.

[evilaustintom]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

After over a week I am not certain what my points was

 

It certainly means the side effect is bigger. But It also means the side effect is more dangerous.

 

I see. Well, I can't argue with the danger issue. I don't want it to be a 'nothing' effect (say, 5 active points worth of side effect) - Then no one would ever have a problem with throwing themselves in the way of whatever attack it was ("Hey, free action!"). Whatever power they're blocking could be a 1d6 pistol killing attack, or a 15d6 major transformation into a newt. Since you don't know what the bodyguard is going to be blocking, I just went with the straightforward 1d6 effect. It usually won't kill you, but it also won't be ignored.

 

It does mean the awkward situations where the super tough guy is still getting hurt from minor attacks. I'm not sure what to do about that.

 

I don't see how I can increase the value of the limitation more than 1/4 (which gets doubled, since it always happens, but then -1/4 because it happens to the bodyguard, rather than Aphrodite). Disagree?

[evilaustintom]

Re: Bodyguards of Love

 

...It does mean the awkward situations where the super tough guy is still getting hurt from minor attacks. I'm not sure what to do about that...

 

Here's an odd idea. What if you remove the 'aways takes affect' multiplier, and add a 'skill roll', but instead of the traditional skills, you use the active defense of the power? So if Super Guy stands in the way of a gunshot, if he has 20 points of resistant PD (30pts of defenses), he would have a roll of 15-. If it was a 4d6 killing attack (60pt power), that's -6 to the check...so on a 9-, the brick can avoid the 1d6 KA damage...

 

...but would that mean if the roll is unsuccessful that Aphrodite's defense doesn't apply either to the attack? Hrm. Need to look at my books when I get home tonight...

 

Ah, it may be a little too clunky anyway, always trying to figure out the roll vs the modifiers on the fly.