Limitations and SFX

[Cinniuint]

I was reading an old thread talking about using a focus for a teleport location, and found an important point that I felt was overlooked. This thread is a spinoff of that thread, originally posted by Samuraiko.

 

The issue was that her gamemaster felt that using a coin, for example, as a fixed location to be given out to characters to allow the PC to teleport to them when needed was inherently a floating rather than a fixed location. I feel that this is more a matter of how the player and GM choose to interpret the matter, but I respect the GM's position even though I don't quite agree with it.

 

The thread can be found here:http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/46225-The-Use-of-a-Focus-for-Teleportation

 

The notion was that the above mentioned coin was a special effect, not a focus, and the location, as very easily changeable, was by its very nature a floating location, even though it was on a fixed object.

 

My observation is this: The rules say "a limitation that isn't a limitation isn't worth any points."

 

By the same token, a limitation that is not allowed to take a limitation, is not limiting. In this example, the character takes Floating Location: coin, and gives the coin to a team mate so that when they call her on the cell phone (or whatever) and say "HELP!", she can teleport directly to them. OK, fine. But, if the character did not get to take a focus limitation, then the coin cannot be taken from the recipient and set into a trap.

 

Similarly, I have seen a character take an HKA with the SFX sword, but no focus. The character needed the sword for the RKA, but if it was dropped or grabbed or still in his scabbard, he need only a passing thought to return it to his hand. It could not be taken.

 

I should also note that the previous discussion was mostly focused on fixed vs. floating, was in 5er, and the focus aspect was so largely ignored that I am not sure that level of focus, OAF-IIF was ever addressed. Doesn't matter. What I want to address here is limitation vs. SFX and the fun confusion that can be created by using the one to create the illusion of the other.

[Lucius]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

True, it could be used to set a trap. It could also be carried to someplace the Teleporter has never been, or even someplace they could never ordinarily go, unlike a standard Floating Location.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Taking a palindromedary to a vet to get it fixed

[Cinniuint]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

No, it couldn't. At least, not if the character paid 5 points for the coin. Then the coin is not a focus, just fx.

[Cinniuint]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

Wow. Tired. Read that post wrong. Still, the standard rules do allow a location to be a portable object, a person, an airline seat. So a character could teleport to a location, floating or fixed, that he has never been to. If the location is a character, even then the location could be kidnapped and placed in a trap.

 

I fear that the location discussion is going to take over the fx vs focus discussion.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

If the coin is a Focus, how can it be taken away? If it can't be (either in-combat or within one Turn out of combat) then it's not a Focus.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

A Fixed Location doesn’t have to be immovable

— it could be a living creature, a particular

airplane seat, or a spot 4m behind the Teleporter,

for example — but it must be a physical location

and can never change.

 

Seems pretty clear that by RAW the coin would be a Fixed Location.

 

EDIT: And it wouldn't get a Focus Limitation, it just is​ the fixed location.

[Christougher]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

I know how I'd rule on the coin, BUT, that's not what you asked.

 

It is entirely possible to have SFX without a limitation applied. It can be confusing, either accidentally or deliberately, but is in no way illegal / required to take a limitation just because the SFX implies it. The undisarmable sword is a perfect example, but how can the RKA take a focus limitation? Ah, see, I fell into the same trap, Focus wasn't mentioned, /sword/ was. Another example I saw on the board a while ago was a wizard who shot lightning bolts from one hand, while waving a wand with the other - in fact, he had a whole collection of wands in case they were taken away. But they weren't a focus or a requirement, they were a distraction technique. Even various "power armor" concepts can be non-focus (Restrainable, Only in Hero ID, or not a focus at all(I'm looking at you Stark!)) power builds.

 

Back to the coin for a moment though. Given the SFX of being a coin, should it be possible to take it away and set it in a trap? Special Effect giveth, Special Effect taketh away, so in my opinon - yes. When it's done for story purpose (Hunted finds out about the coin, tracks it down, sets trap) for a better game, go for it. Trying to make the power unusable(He spent the coin?? Fine, I teleport to it and buy it back) is not how how it should be done.

 

Chris.

[psyber624]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

In this particular case the "location" is a coin. So whereever the coin is the location is. Meaning that the location CAN be taken away and placed in a trap or whatever. The location is in NO way tied to the person, it is tied to the coin. This does not make the coin a Focus for the power. For one thing making it a focus would only affect the TELEPORTER not the guy carrying the coin. And so defining your coin as both a focus and a location would be rather stupid, as you can now only teleport to the coin when you have it (so yeah, not really all that useful.)

 

One part that seems to be the confusion is that not all objects are Foci. If you pick up a baseball bat, its not a foci, its an object. It can be disarmed (note that disarm works on ANY object you are carrying in your hands, NOT just Objects which happen to serve as Foci.) It can be dropped. It can be taken away from you, etc. The fact that it is not a foci in NO way protects it from being manipulated. The same thing goes for your coin. It is an object. So it can be taken from a person, moved by anyone with enough strength to move it, and can even be destroyed. (to note: the fact that it is defined as a location for a teleport gives the object (in this case a coin) no other special properties. It gains no extra defenses, resistances, or powers. And technically the coin is not even a "special effect" of the teleportation power. It is just a location. By choosing such an easily portable location you gain benefits, but have to face the consequences. There is no reason or justification for a limitation based on the fact you chose to make it a coin.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

psyber624 sums it up pretty well.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

"Floating" doesn't mean it moves, or can move. It means that you have a "slot" that contains a location, and by spending a Turn, you can "load" a new location into the slot. FAQ entries and clarifications allow you to define a location as, for instance, a seat in a moving vehicle. You could define that seat as a fixed location, which means that you have one location that is forever and always defined as the seat in that vehicle.

 

I agree that a coin is not a location. It's not a place that you can be. If a player were to start with the moving vehicle analogy and try to slip and slide it via corner cases to a coin, I'd not want them in my game.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

"Floating" doesn't mean it moves, or can move. It means that you have a "slot" that contains a location, and by spending a Turn, you can "load" a new location into the slot. FAQ entries and clarifications allow you to define a location as, for instance, a seat in a moving vehicle. You could define that seat as a fixed location, which means that you have one location that is forever and always defined as the seat in that vehicle.

 

I agree that a coin is not a location. It's not a place that you can be. If a player were to start with the moving vehicle analogy and try to slip and slide it via corner cases to a coin, I'd not want them in my game.

As per RAW "a living creature" counts as a location. If a fixed location can be "a foot away from Joe, wherever he may be" than why not "next to a designated object (coin)?

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

As per RAW "a living creature" counts as a location. If a fixed location can be "a foot away from Joe' date=' wherever he may be" than why not "next to a designated object (coin)?[/quote']

 

Interesting. 6E1 does say that, but later in the same paragraph (on the next page) it says this:

 

Unless the GM permits' date=' a character may not establish a Fixed or Floating Fixed Location in relation to another person (such as “two meters behind Dr. Destroyer”).[/quote']

 

This seems to be an inconsistency. i'd accept that Steve's intent was to allow a living creature as a location, but I'm personally a bit iffy on it anyway. So I'd disallow it.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

Interesting. 6E1 does say that, but later in the same paragraph (on the next page) it says this:

 

 

 

This seems to be an inconsistency. i'd accept that Steve's intent was to allow a living creature as a location, but I'm personally a bit iffy on it anyway. So I'd disallow it.

That seems more to avoid the issue of "I make my archenemy a fixed location for my teleportation and can attack them and get out of combat/surprize bonuses anytime I like" to me, especially considering who was used as the example.

I guess the main thing I don't get is why you are fine with a large moving object (seat in a car) but not a small movable object.

[Rhino]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

What does the rule of cool say about it? Sounds like a pretty cool idea. Does it have negative effects on game balance or some other uncool factors that I am not considering?

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

That seems more to avoid the issue of "I make my archenemy a fixed location for my teleportation and can attack them and get out of combat/surprize bonuses anytime I like" to me, especially considering who was used as the example.

I guess the main thing I don't get is why you are fine with a large moving object (seat in a car) but not a small movable object.

 

I'm not, actually. I was just pointing it out as a rule. To me, for something to be a location, you have to be able to give a meaningful answer to "Where are you?" "Next to a coin" or "4m from Doc D" or "Seat 24D on Flight 1278" aren't.

[Rhino]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

I like the idea of being able to use a coin or some such portable object as a teleport beacon.

[Martin2]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

In one way it could be possible to abuse the "fixed" location 1 point and have say 3 coins for 3 points and say you appear 1m north of the coin.

 

But I think that is an abuse of the points of a "floating" location. You effectively are dropping of the 1 point coins as a "floating" location with the possibility of dropping it in the pocket of a villain that could not be the target of a "floating" location.

 

Obviously that villain could spend it / leave it in his other trousers etc. But you would always get it back as you just teleport back to it (would it be theft if you take it from someone else?).

 

Could be a floating location 5 points with an OAF would take it down to a 2 point cost. The problem it is seems to be a cheat to get the same effect of a 5 point power for a 2 or 1 point cost.

 

I do not think I would allow it.

[ayinde]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

to me the coin sounds more like a funky summon power

[Cinniuint]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

Setting aside the coin issue, does anyone have any other interesting uses of fx to mimic limitations without taking limitations?

[psyber624]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

In one way it could be possible to abuse the "fixed" location 1 point and have say 3 coins for 3 points and say you appear 1m north of the coin.

 

But I think that is an abuse of the points of a "floating" location. You effectively are dropping of the 1 point coins as a "floating" location with the possibility of dropping it in the pocket of a villain that could not be the target of a "floating" location.

 

Obviously that villain could spend it / leave it in his other trousers etc. But you would always get it back as you just teleport back to it (would it be theft if you take it from someone else?).

 

Could be a floating location 5 points with an OAF would take it down to a 2 point cost. The problem it is seems to be a cheat to get the same effect of a 5 point power for a 2 or 1 point cost.

 

I do not think I would allow it.

 

The difference is that since it is still a fixed location there are a number of issues.

1. If it is destroyed the points spent on it are forever gone, you don't normally get a "rebate" on those points unless your GM is feeling generous.

2. Unless it is destroyed the point is ALWAYS that coin. You could use floating to make a coin a location, and then if something bad happened to the coin (it was put in a secure vault, deathtrap, etc) you could just take some time to move that "slot" to a different location. On the other hand if it is fixed then you would basically "lose" that location until you could retrieve your coin in some manner. (Note that unless you buy a different power to allow you to do so making an object a "location" gives you no special means of detecting it. If the coin was buried, for instance, you would teleport into the ground (possibly taking damage depending on your teleport power) then be forced out. You would not be able to tell where exactly the coin was buried. If the coin was placed in a large bag full of similar coins you can't tell them apart easily (I.E. it doesn't "glow" when you look at it or anything). You could spend a long time trying to sort through the various coins to determine which exactly is your "location". Also, if the coin was placed into a hazardous environment (such as deep space, at the top of a mountain, etc.) you don't get any "warning" about that prior to using your teleport so using that is always a risk.)

Yes there are abusive ways to use such a power but that is really not related to whether the coin is fixed or floating (and I do believe the difference in cost between the two is minor and addressed by the two issues listed above). As to abusive uses as a GM you can simply state that it wont work as the player intended as that is abusive. Of course you always have the option of ruling that a coin (or similar object) is not an acceptable location as well. It's your game of course.

 

 

Also, again, you cannot buy a location AS a focus without rendering it useless. In order to buy a location with a focus the location and the focus have to be different things. (You could buy a location (coin) with a signet ring as the focus. If you don't have the ring you cant teleport to your coin as a location, you would have to try it as a normal teleport where you can't see the destination (with an attack roll)

[psyber624]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

Setting aside the coin issue' date=' does anyone have any other interesting uses of fx to mimic limitations without taking limitations?[/quote']

Not exactly sure what you are asking there. Fx are appearances, Limitations are game mechanics. You can't really use SFX to mimic game mechanics. Now, if you are talking about instances where something appears to be a limitation without taking that limitation that is quite different (such as a non-focus sword/wand/whatever. It appears to be a "focus" but doesn't have the limitation so it can't be taken away). I have seen dozens of such, some intentional, some not. Wings as a sfx for flight for instance suggests tons of limitations (restrainable, Only works in an atmosphere, Affected by high winds, etc.) and frequently they don't take the appropriate limitations. The Wings are just a sfx and the power works like any old flight power.

 

I have been reading Arcane Adversaries recently and there is a villain in there that frequently carries and waves a wand around, but none of his powers have it as a focus. He INTENDS for people to mistakenly believe he needs the wand and possibly waste time trying to take it away from him.

 

I created a fire based character a while back who pretends to be afraid of water. Of course water doesn't actually affect him but he finds it funny when people try to douse him with water. Besides, he usually uses a Power: Fire roll to then attack them with an AOE Steam attack just for fun (doesn't really do much damage but it can be really hilarious)

[Cinniuint]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

Not exactly sure what you are asking there. Fx are appearances, Limitations are game mechanics. You can't really use SFX to mimic game mechanics. Now, if you are talking about instances where something appears to be a limitation without taking that limitation that is quite different (such as a non-focus sword/wand/whatever. It appears to be a "focus" but doesn't have the limitation so it can't be taken away). I have seen dozens of such, some intentional, some not. Wings as a sfx for flight for instance suggests tons of limitations (restrainable, Only works in an atmosphere, Affected by high winds, etc.) and frequently they don't take the appropriate limitations. The Wings are just a sfx and the power works like any old flight power.

 

I have been reading Arcane Adversaries recently and there is a villain in there that frequently carries and waves a wand around, but none of his powers have it as a focus. He INTENDS for people to mistakenly believe he needs the wand and possibly waste time trying to take it away from him.

 

The focus without the focus limitation was the exact example I was thinking of when I asked the question. A character with an attack and some other powers that were granted by a sword that would appear in his hand whenever he wanted.

 

I wasn't thinking about it, but I have also used the fake focus trick, or the focus is real, but only applies an advantage to a native power.

 

What I was hoping for, was some other apparent limitations that really aren't. The fear of water is close to what I was thinking of, although it is a pretended complication. Reminds me of a blind character I made some years ago. The character took a 5 point physical limitation, in that he couldn't read text or pictures on a page, or perceive colors. And an unusual looks complication in that he had no eyes, or even eye sockets (birth defect). But the character was a telekinetic with telekinetic feedback. He had the sense of touch usable at range. And since the TK had indirect, he also had N-ray on his tactile sense.

 

Come to think of it, that character had misdirection going too. He used several pounds of iron filings in a cloud around him, which allowed him to use his force field against energy attacks, and hid his very distinctive face. It also helped him to pretend that he could only use his TK on ferrous objects.

[Lucius]

Re: Limitations and SFX

 

Power Armor bought as "Only in Alternate ID" thus avoiding the complications of it being an actual Focus, is pretty common.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Only in Palindromedary ID