Slice That Multipower

[bigdamnhero]

Kindof related to our discussion in the Special Powers in Frameworks thread. In my new Champions campaign, the mage character has a Multipower for her spells: a mix of necromancy & darkness effects primarily. So far so good.

 

The PC also has a staff that lets her Teleport; and she can hit people with it (Hand To Hand Attack) or stab with the pointy end (HKA). The staff isn't technically a Focus, because she can teleport the staff back if it's taken away (ala Thors hammer); but we slapped a Restrainable on it because it can be blocked by a teleport jammer, etc. Also easily stuffed into a Multipower.

 

Question: is that one Multipower or two?

 

Not asking a rules question, as either way is permissible GM permitting. I'm looking for opinions on how you would slice it if you were teh player or GM. Lump them all together in one "Spells" MP because the staff is basically just a "material component" for for those slots? Or keep them separate because they're built around two different concepts?

 

Discuss.

[Southern Cross]

The advantage of having two Multipower reserves is that you can use both Multipowers simultaneously. If you only have one Multipower, you must allocate the reserve points amongst the various slots. Also, having two Multipowers makes more sense thematically - unless the staff is made from shadow or necromantic energy, it's a physical object, and shouldn't be Dispelled or Supressed by Adjustment Powers that effect such energies.

[L. Marcus]

Feels like two Multipowers to me.

[Ninja-Bear]

I'd say two also. I like to keep weapon multipowers seperate.

[Hugh Neilson]

The advantage of having two Multipower reserves is that you can use both Multipowers simultaneously. If you only have one Multipower, you must allocate the reserve points amongst the various slots. Also, having two Multipowers makes more sense thematically - unless the staff is made from shadow or necromantic energy, it's a physical object, and shouldn't be Dispelled or Supressed by Adjustment Powers that effect such energies.

 

I agree with the posters above that this seems like two multipowers.  Mechanically, being able to teleport or attack with the weapon while casting another spell is a nice advantage.

 

To the question of adjustment powers, I don't believe you can target a Multipower itself with a dispel or suppress - it just holds powers, and isn't one itself.  Its slots are not automatically linked (like the old Elemental Control or Unified Power in 6e), so Dispelling one doesn't dispel any others.

[bigdamnhero]

The advantage of having two Multipower reserves is that you can use both Multipowers simultaneously.

Definitely. But even if it's two MPs, she still couldn't teleport and then hit someone with the staff HA or HKA. Generally I avoid putting movement powers in frameworks for that reason. But if that's the only consideration (not saying it is), then that could be an argument for having the Teleport as a standalone power and moving the staff attacks into the Spells MP. Which would still be cheaper than two separate MPs, tho more expensive than putting everything in one MP.

 

I'd say two also. I like to keep weapon multipowers seperate.

I can see that. But in this case, the Spells MP also has attack powers: an RKA, a Drain, etc. Does that change how you feel about it? (Not challenging, just curious.)

 

I don't believe you can target a Multipower itself with a dispel or suppress - it just holds powers, and isn't one itself.  Its slots are not automatically linked (like the old Elemental Control or Unified Power in 6e), so Dispelling one doesn't dispel any others.

True, you would have to target both the slot and the MP itself. (Something that makes sense from a balance standpoint, but generally doesn't work for me narratively, so I tend to throw Unified Power on a lot of my frameworks. But I digress.)

[Hyper-Man]

re: Drains vs. Frameworks

 

The question what has to be targeted becomes moot if the Unified Limitation is applied to the Framework.

[Tasha]

Kindof related to our discussion in the Special Powers in Frameworks thread. In my new Champions campaign, the mage character has a Multipower for her spells: a mix of necromancy & darkness effects primarily. So far so good.

 

The PC also has a staff that lets her Teleport; and she can hit people with it (Hand To Hand Attack) or stab with the pointy end (HKA). The staff isn't technically a Focus, because she can teleport the staff back if it's taken away (ala Thors hammer); but we slapped a Restrainable on it because it can be blocked by a teleport jammer, etc. Also easily stuffed into a Multipower.

 

Question: is that one Multipower or two?

 

Not asking a rules question, as either way is permissible GM permitting. I'm looking for opinions on how you would slice it if you were teh player or GM. Lump them all together in one "Spells" MP because the staff is basically just a "material component" for for those slots? Or keep them separate because they're built around two different concepts?

 

Discuss.

I would build the staff as a Multipower for the attacks and have the Teleportation be a power outside the MP. The Attackpowers would have restrainable because someone stronger could grab the staff and prevent the weaker person from hitting them with it. The Teleportation wouldn't have restrainable. BTW this magic item would be something seporate from the character. So it would be it's own Multipower and additional power.

[psyber624]

You have to be careful with this sort of thing to make sure that you are reasoning from GAME EFFECT and not SPECIAL EFFECT.

 

If you make it two Multipowers you are VASTLY increasing the cost to the character. In return the character can conceiveably use both a spell and the staff at the same time. If you would not allow this, or the construct doesn't allow it (because the spells have limitations like Gestures or the like) then requiring them to be two different Multipowers is punishing the character for her choice of special effect. In GAME EFFECTS someone who had the same spell pool, but also had a teleport spell, an RKA spell, and a HA Spell as part of their "spell pool" would get a huge discount but would be effectively the same.

 

Of course I am NOT saying it should be one multipower. I'm saying whether it should be 1 or 2 MP's is determined by how it works, not how it looks.

 

 

This is one of the issues I have with Multipowers/VPP's in general. In many cases there is simply insufficient game effect reason NOT to cram all the powers you can into a framework as long as you can be reasonably sure you wont need them all at once. Forbidding it for certain archetypes/concepts because it doesn't "Fit the concept" is punishing a player for a special effect decision and encouraging all players to play concepts that are basically "anything goes".

 

"Sorry Flambe The Fireguy, i don't think shrinking fits your "Flame powers" Multipower concept so you can't put it in there. But sure Batdude, your VPP can have a shrinking spray can if you want it, works for me!"

[bigdamnhero]

I'm saying whether it should be 1 or 2 MP's is determined by how it works, not how it looks.

Good way of putting it, thanks.

[Tasha]

"Sorry Flambe The Fireguy, i don't think shrinking fits your "Flame powers" Multipower concept so you can't put it in there. But sure Batdude, your VPP can have a shrinking spray can if you want it, works for me!"

When I see unusual powers in a MP, I ask how the power is supposed to work. Because if the player purchased the power for their character because it fits their vision, they will have an idea how it works and how it looks. If they have no idea how it works/looks then chances are that the power is just something added because "They wanted to have shrinking on a character" and not because they fit it into their special effect.

[Ninja-Bear]

Bigdamnhero I guess the answer lies in what happens if the pc magic is restrained. Can she still use the staff? More I think of it, it probably ne one mp. Is her mp that much different than the famed utility belt?

[bigdamnhero]

@ Ninja-Bear: As currently written, the staff powers (teleport, HA & HKA) have Restrainable. The idea is that she can normally teleport the staff back to herself if disarmed, so no Focus. But that can be jammed, so I allowed Restrainable. The spells MP doesn't have any common Limitation. At this point, that is really the only thing mechanically separating the two power sets. While it's common to see different Limitations on individual slots in an MP, when you start having common Lims for certain subsets of slots, that makes me wonder if maybe that subset shouldn't be its own Framework.

[Tasha]

It's a separate magical item from her Magic Spell pool. Therefore it's it's own Multipower.

[Ninja-Bear]

Bigdamnhero - for clairity then the only thing magical about the staff is that she can teleport it to her at anytime? So if her magic is disabled and the staff is around, then its just a normal staff-right? Then perhaps a more complex mechanical but more straight forward special effect build would be to have in her magic mp a slot which summons her staff to her. P.s. I haven't that much experience with summon so it might be a bigger pain than its worth.

[Doc Samson]

I'm going to attempt to play devil's advocate. If this were a tech based character who had various electrical gadgets and a few sonic gun based slots in the same multipower would you still question it? If your answer was no, then I would suggest that perhaps we are allowing the sfx to exert too much influence on the mechanics. If this is the case and there are no rules violations, I would let the player decide.

[psyber624]

When I see unusual powers in a MP, I ask how the power is supposed to work. Because if the player purchased the power for their character because it fits their vision, they will have an idea how it works and how it looks. If they have no idea how it works/looks then chances are that the power is just something added because "They wanted to have shrinking on a character" and not because they fit it into their special effect.

And what is wrong with that. IE why do you question it? If a character "wanted to have shrinking on a character" why does it matter what the sfx of it is? Or how it fits their concept? I get that well designed and logical builds can be more fun to play, but if you deny a player a power he wants because it doesn't fit with the special effects or the "concept" he has of his character then you are essentially telling your players that they should all play characters with special effects/concepts that can allow anything. Magic Spell based characters are one of the most extreme examples of this (is there ANY power you cant find a spell for?) but Gadget guys can be almost as bad. And you can get away with absolutely anything by slapping the term "Mutant" onto your character.

[bigdamnhero]

Thanks everyone for the feedback. I think for this particular character, it makes more sense to keep the two separate, but the discussion has been very valuable.

 

Bigdamnhero - for clairity then the only thing magical about the staff is that she can teleport it to her at anytime?

The staff also gives her Teleportation as a movement power. Really, it was kindof conceived of as a magic item that allows her to teleport, but doubles as a weapon. The recall feature was added after the fact when I asked the player what happens if someone takes her staff away (ie - is it a true Focus or not).

 

If this were a tech based character who had various electrical gadgets and a few sonic gun based slots in the same multipower would you still question it?

Fair point. In fact, that's exactly what led me to ask the question: another PC in the group has a gadget VPP that is pretty broadly defined.

 

I would let the player decide.

The player is fine with it as a separate MP. But the player is pretty new to Hero, so I'm providing advice on the character build.

 

I get that well designed and logical builds can be more fun to play, but if you deny a player a power he wants because it doesn't fit with the special effects or the "concept" he has of his character then you are essentially telling your players that they should all play characters with special effects/concepts that can allow anything.

I think the keys are consistency and fairness. If you limit one player to a narrowly-defined list of powers based on sfx, then when another player submits an Anything Goes concept, you may have to help them focus it down. Conversely, if you let one player have a Cosmic Gadget Pool that contains anything conceivable, then you can’t really complain when Magic Guy wants to pile everything into his Magic framework.

 

Magic Spell based characters are one of the most extreme examples of this (is there ANY power you cant find a spell for?) but Gadget guys can be almost as bad. And you can get away with absolutely anything by slapping the term "Mutant" onto your character.

Only if you let it. As Tasha pointed out, all you have to do is require mages to define their sfx as “shadow magic” or “fire magic” or whatever, rather than “anything magic.” Granted, the latter is how magic is frequently portrayed in comics. (Looking at you Zatanna…you too Scarlet Witch…and not just you’re so nice to look at.) But you don’t have to define it that way in your campaign. Similarly, gadget pools can be defined around “gravity gadgets” or “sonic gadgets” or whatever. With VPPs, the player is even rewarded with a Limitation for selecting a more narrowly-defined group of powers.

 

And getting back to the original point: there’s nothing saying a mutant can’t have two different sets of mutant powers. But I think the GM would be justified in requiring they be built as two separate Frameworks. That seems to me the easiest way to encourage player creativity without punishing players for creating narrowly-tailored concepts. Again, as long as it’s done consistently.

[Christopher]

There is nothing prevent you from putting the Staff's powers into the Multipower used for Spells. Something like:

 

60 Point Multipower

3  6 DC HA, 0 END (+1/2), 45 AP, Restrainable

3  6 DC HKA, 0 END(+1/2), 45 AP, Restrainable

2  30m Teleport, 30 AP

6  12 DC Blast

6  12 DC other Blast

6  12 DC RKA

 

Upside:

No need for multiple Multipower Pools. Thus potentially Cheaper.

 

Downsides:

Cannot apply Limitations of Spells or Staff to Multipower Pool cost unless all powers share them.

Cannot combine Attacks of the Staff with Spell Attacks (general Limitation for Frameworks/Multiple Attack).

Also the rule that "you cannot change a Framework selection more then once per Turn" would disallow combination of Teleport and Attacks. Unless teleport was "slotted" in the phase before: Teleport> reslot to Attack power> Attack would be a legal combo. As would be making that Teleport a Flexible slot/adding a 15 AP Teleport slot (so you can slot a combo of 15m Teleport + 45 AP of HTH-Attack).

 

I am uncertain if Restrainable fits here. Her attack with the Staff is hardly more restrainable then her punching you with her hand. That you can prevent somebody from using an Attack by Grabbing the Limb it comes from is part of the Rule about "Origin Point of Powers". Since she can teleport it, grabbing her hand is the only effective way to stop it. If the staff is also indestructible, taking it from her effectively requires a full power dampening - something the GM can do sometimes regardless if you have a Limitation value on those powers or not.

[bigdamnhero]

I am uncertain if Restrainable fits here...Since she can teleport it, grabbing her hand is the only effective way to stop it.

Normally I'd agree. But the principal bad guys in this campaign have teleportation jammers - they don't come up in every battle, but they're not uncommon. So if the PC is in a teleportation jamming field and gets disarmed, no staff. Not something that will come up a lot, but the player understands that it will come up now and then, and is okay with that, so I allowed it.

[Christopher]

Normally I'd agree. But the principal bad guys in this campaign have teleportation jammers - they don't come up in every battle, but they're not uncommon. So if the PC is in a teleportation jamming field and gets disarmed, no staff. Not something that will come up a lot, but the player understands that it will come up now and then, and is okay with that, so I allowed it.

That makes restrainable viable, but I would not put it beyond -1/4. You need teleport jammers and have to disarm her and have to prevent her from jsut taking it back the normal way.

-1/2 already means "you can restrain with Grab what could not normally be restraiend with Grab". And Grabbing is a very common maneuver (literally everyone can do it).

[ghost-angel]

I would do something .... well, different. Because that's how I am (also, this discussion is why I chose this campaign to build a stock-standard martial brick.... I digress).

 

Since it's not a true Focus, just an object, the staff moves from Mechanics to Special Effect, mostly.

 

The Multipower is for Spells - Necromantic and Darkness magics. The Teleport Spell is a spell, and makes sense inside the Multipower of Spells, and has Restrainable to show that it can be suppressed by the bad guys with moderate ease.

 

The staffs attack abilities are not spells, I don't think they belong in the Multipower. The HKA and HA should be bought outside the Multipower. A Teleport Suppression won't stop the character from Whacking Someone (I don't think, if it does, ignore this part), so Restrainable doesn't really help here. On the other hand, if a Teleport Suppression prevents them from magically recalling the staff to them, it does qualify under that....

 

The HKA and HA of the staff are part of the same object, if rendering one inert renders the second inert then they could have Unified applied to them - and only them - as two Powers outside the Multipower with one Special Effect.

 

Now, the debatable fun part: does the Teleport Spell get Unified with the two Attack Powers (Mechanically, I see no reason this can't be done, and in fact this is the best part of the Unified Limitation: pulling together Powers from different 'places' on a Character to show they're connected.) If rendering the staff inert prevents the Teleport from being used (beyond simply taking it away for a little bit) - it might be good. Just need to answer why, if the Teleport were disable why can't they use it as a whacking-stick? It might just be a -0 Unified Limitation on the Teleport spell.

 

tl;dr:

Spell Mulitpower:

-Slot 1: Teleport; Restrainable (staff); and other spelly Limitations

-Slot 2-6: spells of various kinds

 

Hand Attack: Staff - Restrainable; Unified; Hand-Attack-Only; 

Hand KA: Staff - Restainable; Unified;

 

You have a whacky-stick, if you need to teleport, you gotta have the whacky-stick to do it, but the whacky-stick is not actually a spell and not part of the Spell Multipower.

[bigdamnhero]

That makes restrainable viable, but I would not put it beyond -1/4.

Agreed. -1/4 was what we gave it.

 

The Multipower is for Spells - Necromantic and Darkness magics. The Teleport Spell is a spell, and makes sense inside the Multipower of Spells, and has Restrainable to show that it can be suppressed by the bad guys with moderate ease.

I agree. Tho putting the Teleport into the Spells MP is problematic tactically, because then you can't teleport and cast spells on the same Phase.

 

The staffs attack abilities are not spells, I don't think they belong in the Multipower. The HKA and HA should be bought outside the Multipower.

Makes sense.

 

On the other hand, if a Teleport Suppression prevents them from magically recalling the staff to them, it does qualify under that....

That's correct.

 

The HKA and HA of the staff are part of the same object, if rendering one inert renders the second inert then they could have Unified applied to them - and only them - as two Powers outside the Multipower with one Special Effect.

You could, although Draining a power defined as "I have a stick" can be problematic from an sfx standpoint.

 

Now, the debatable fun part: does the Teleport Spell get Unified with the two Attack Powers (Mechanically, I see no reason this can't be done, and in fact this is the best part of the Unified Limitation: pulling together Powers from different 'places' on a Character to show they're connected.) If rendering the staff inert prevents the Teleport from being used (beyond simply taking it away for a little bit) - it might be good. Just need to answer why, if the Teleport were disable why can't they use it as a whacking-stick? It might just be a -0 Unified Limitation on the Teleport spell.

Based on the player's concept, jamming/draining/etc. the Teleport would not disable the whacking function. So I'd say no Unified for the Teleport. But taking away the staff means you can neither teleport nor whack with it.

 

Spell Mulitpower:

-Slot 1: Teleport; Restrainable (staff); and other spelly Limitations

-Slot 2-6: spells of various kinds

 

Hand Attack: Staff - Restrainable; Unified; Hand-Attack-Only; 

Hand KA: Staff - Restainable; Unified;

Two questions:

1. Would you have any problem with making the HA and HKA a Multipower? And if so,
2. Is there any reason not to have the Teleport in the staff MP instead of the Spells MP?

Again, I don't think there's a right/wrong way here. Just curious.

[bigdamnhero]

(also, this discussion is why I chose this campaign to build a stock-standard martial brick.... I digress).

BTW, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this as well.

[ghost-angel]

You could, although Draining a power defined as "I have a stick" can be problematic from an sfx standpoint.

 

Yes, but doesn't make it mechanically unsound. If something removes the Stick it removes both powers. Perhaps instead of Unified you could use Physical Manifestation. Or another Custom Limitation. Anything to signify the two attack powers come with the same SFX/"focus".

 

Two questions:

1. Would you have any problem with making the HA and HKA a Multipower? And if so,
2. Is there any reason not to have the Teleport in the staff MP instead of the Spells MP?

Again, I don't think there's a right/wrong way here. Just curious.

 

1. Not especially. I don't normally think Multipower until I get to three powers, but conceptually it makes sense.

2. Nope. No reason at all. Though it tends to separate the Teleport Spell from the others, making it a sort of Special Spell if not part of their normal casting pool. But that's merely mechanics.

 

BTW, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this as well.

 

No reflection on the campaign, or GM, or anything else. Player just wanted a character that needed no Power Frameworks, or fiddled with odd constructs. I like characters like that just fine (example: Enigma), but the saturday group i had just gotten done with not only a more complex character but a series of house rules, and playing with other game systems. By the time it came to character construction time I really only wanted to focus on two powers: defense and offense.