Dispeling Forcefield with a Focus

[ghost-angel]

Thank you

[Sean Waters]

The rules say you dispel the whole power or you don't.  If the whole power includes things your SFX don't target, so what?  There is no legal way to dispel the rPD of Resistant Protection without also dispelling the rED ⁺.

 

If you want to skag a force field belt, a 1 pip penetrating RKA will do it.

 

That actually demonstrates a number of the problems with the Hero System, or at least the way people play the Hero System*.

 

 

 

* Or, possibly, it demonstrates the strength of the Hero System**.

 

** Only it doesn't.

 

⁺ Well, this Hero System, so you can do anything, points allowing (PA).  You can dispel the whole thing but have a limited dispel so that it only turns off part of a compound power.   Infinite potential = infinite footnotes.

[ghost-angel]

The rules say you dispel the whole power or you don't.  If the whole power includes things your SFX don't target, so what?  There is no legal way to dispel the rPD of Resistant Protection without also dispelling the rED ⁺.

 

Which I've already demonstrated is actually a Poor Construct, a handy shortcut, and a Reason To Change Things. Specifically in regards to the idiocy that is "Resistant Defense" as a single Power.

[bigdamnhero]

There is no legal way to dispel the rPD of Resistant Protection without also dispelling the rED ⁺.

Well...except that the rules kindof say (or at least imply) that you can: 6e1 p194.

 

But I agree that's the central question: are rPD and rED separate Powers or just two elements of one Power? I think you can argue a good case on either side, as several folks here have done. The broader question of exactly what constitutes a single Power is not always 100% clear. If I buy Sight & Hearing Flash Def, is that one power or two? Even if one is defined as sunglasses and the other as earplugs, do you still have to Adjust both of them? * Does it change things if tehy're both defined as "I'm just really tough"? **  What if I have Change Environment +1 Wind and -1 Temp: If Weather Guy wants to Dispel the winds, does he have to beat the combined AP of both elements, or just "the one he cares about."*** Ultimately a lot comes down to sfx, GM judgement and What Works For Your Game. Which is why I asked for opinions.

 

* Personally I'd say no, they're two separate Powers.

** Personally, I'd say that doesn't change it, if only out of fairness & consistency.

*** Now here, I'd probably say they are one Power and you'd need to Dispel both because they seem inextricably linked. But again YMMV.

[Sean Waters]

The original post was about someone using a MP slot, which is cheap, to overcome defences.

 

So, if we make it easy to do, it is going to happen a lot.  If your team are all carrying lasers, you only need dispel rED, the opponent is left with crippled defences, you win.  Whilst it might seem logical on the face of it that rPD and rED should not be a single power, think through the consequences of splitting them: you have to buy 'difficult to dispel' for all your defences, all the time.  Hero is already too biased toward attack powers, or rather frameworks already tip that balance too far.  The consequence of this particular trick is that you would be upping the cost of the most common defences.

[Beast]

problem is that dispel gets 1d6 per 3 pts so it will get way more body than a normal 1d6 per 5pts or 1d6k per 15pts
 

dispel is a setup power for a  2nd attack

you want to disable or destroy then DO A DISABLE/DESTROY ATTACK

Transform was mentioned
Target the focus w/ a x2 or more penetrating RKA
Drain would work as the focus's control systems reroute or reboot the system
 

I would only allow the player to pull this kind of power stunt once or twice then have the player BUY 1 of the 3 methods I listed here if they want to make it part of what they do

 

the limitation Unified for me equals in this case the same as if the trigger puller bough Expanded Effects affecting multiple powers

 

Whether or not the focus actually gets damaged/destroyed doesn't matter. You can still use the mechanic that already exists to determine whether or not the focus goes on the fritz due to the incoming damage.

 

By counting up the BODY of the Dispel dice and applying it as you would any other attack.

[ghost-angel]

The original post was about someone using a MP slot, which is cheap, to overcome defences.

 

So, if we make it easy to do, it is going to happen a lot.  If your team are all carrying lasers, you only need dispel rED, the opponent is left with crippled defences, you win.  Whilst it might seem logical on the face of it that rPD and rED should not be a single power, think through the consequences of splitting them: you have to buy 'difficult to dispel' for all your defences, all the time.  Hero is already too biased toward attack powers, or rather frameworks already tip that balance too far.  The consequence of this particular trick is that you would be upping the cost of the most common defences.

 

PD and ED are separate Powers - that Resistant Defenses of the same aren't is a design flaw. That's all there is to it. Total design flaw. "Resistant Defense" shouldn't actually Be A Power itself.

[prestidigitator]

Dude!  You're the GM.  If you want to allow the rPD portion to be Dispelled separately, then change how the aliens have bought their force field: one power for rPD, and a separate power for rED.  It's not the system that isn't allowing the Dispel; it's how you've used the system to buy your powers.

[bigdamnhero]

Dude!  You're the GM.  If you want to allow the rPD portion to be Dispelled separately, then change how the aliens have bought their force field: one power for rPD, and a separate power for rED.  It's not the system that isn't allowing the Dispel; it's how you've used the system to buy your powers.

Taking that logic to Reducto Ad Absurdium, I'm going to buy each point of STR as a separate Power so that each Drain can only affect 1 point at a time...

I realize I can build it any way I want. But I'm trying to reason out a consistent position that's balanced and fair to the Player.

[prestidigitator]

Taking that logic to Reducto Ad Absurdium, I'm going to buy each point of STR as a separate Power so that each Drain can only affect 1 point at a time...

I realize I can build it any way I want. But I'm trying to reason out a consistent position that's balanced and fair to the Player.

Yeah, yeah.  I'm not suggesting you try to, "game the system."  I'm suggesting you build the powers in a way that best models your narrative.  If the physical part of the force field is independent enough of the rest of the force field to be taken down separately, why not just buy it that way and avoid the question of whether you need to house rule on Adjustment Powers used in this way?  It'll probably even get you thinking about what SFX will make sense if suddenly physical attacks can get through but others can't....

[Lucius]

PD and ED are separate Powers - that Resistant Defenses of the same aren't is a design flaw. That's all there is to it. Total design flaw. "Resistant Defense" shouldn't actually Be A Power itself.

Actually, the design flaw is that PD and ED are separate. There should be one Power, Defense, and if it's only good for certain kinds of attacks or not against certain kinds of attacks, that should be a Limitation. And the value of the Limitation would depend on the campaign, too; "not vs physical kinetic attacks" is a lesser Limitation in a comic book game where there are all kind of rays and bolts and blasts aimed at you, than in a fantasy or action adventure game where blade and bullets and fists and clubs are the majority of ways to get hurt.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says, but that's a discussion for another thread

[ghost-angel]

No, I like that the system divides things into Physical and Energy, it's one of the attractions I have to how Hero handles defenses and attacks. I think it better allows Mechanics to simulate Special Effects.

 

And as long as PD and ED are actually separate Powers; then rPD and rED should follow suit.

[prestidigitator]

Hmm.  It's a good point, though.  If the system didn't divide things between physical and energy (and maybe mental too, for that matter), but gave you complete freedom to still do so in all of your games....  Anyone who is comfortable with the current split could continue using it, but people who want room to choose splits with more freedom would be better off.

[Grailknight]

Actually, the design flaw is that PD and ED are separate. There should be one Power, Defense, and if it's only good for certain kinds of attacks or not against certain kinds of attacks, that should be a Limitation. And the value of the Limitation would depend on the campaign, too; "not vs physical kinetic attacks" is a lesser Limitation in a comic book game where there are all kind of rays and bolts and blasts aimed at you, than in a fantasy or action adventure game where blade and bullets and fists and clubs are the majority of ways to get hurt.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says, but that's a discussion for another thread

 

A small change on the surface, but one that has major ramifications.

 

Fortunately, it is also unnecessary.

 

Buying Resistant Defense for both PD and ED together is a shorthand used in character generation. Nothing prevents you from purchasing them separately and it takes an advantage (Allocate) to unite them so that the points mix together. 

 

The question asked in the OP is whether you Dispel one specific power based on that power's cost or based on the cost of powers it was purchased in combination with.  

 

I'd have no problem with this power(the special effects being used are another issue), but I'd also have no problem with any other Adjustment power being used here. The balance issue in this is how Dispel and Focus react in the OP's campaign. I'd tend to favor RAW here, so how the focus was defined would be the overriding factor.

 

 

Hmm.  It's a good point, though.  If the system didn't divide things between physical and energy (and maybe mental too, for that matter), but gave you complete freedom to still do so in all of your games....  Anyone who is comfortable with the current split could continue using it, but people who want room to choose splits with more freedom would be better off.

 

While this would streamline the rules, IMO it would remove even more flavor from them. Powers would be further divorced  from special effects (good for rules question, bad for engaging players more harm than good to me). Don'r remove tools that you'll just have to reinvent as house rules.

[Sean Waters]

Adjustment powers that can add or remove adders i.e. bits of the power rather than the whole thing are bought at a premium (6.1.142).  You could apply a similar advantage to allow powers the be partially affected.  Not everything can be fixed by simply getting the price right though.

 

Logically either the rules say that you CAN affect a bit of the power or you can't.  Unfortunately they seem to say both, or you can read it that way, the bit about targeting SFX.

 

As a GM (read 'spoilsport') my concern is that a framework could be loaded with ways to take down defences cheaply and easily.  As an occasional trick that might be OK, but if the entire combat is: Adjuster turns off Megathon's defences, the rest of the team KO Megathon...well, that sounds boring, the prime sin of roleplaying.  Not the first time, that will probably involve high fives, but after that either the GM builds everything differently or adopts the tactic or it all gets too easy.  Boring.  Even if you could do it I would not let you.

 

I come back to this: an OIF can be taken out with a 1 pip RKA penetrating attack, if it only has one power.  The attack is so cheap you can layer on Penetrating to overcome any impenetrable.  The reason you can not do it in practice, is the GM says 'No'. 

 

A lot of us like messing with the character creation and coming up with interesting synergies, but to be honest, that sort of thing detracts from the actual game, which is not the character creation, it is the actual roleplaying, character interaction, dice rolling bit.

[Christougher]

I come back to this: an OIF can be taken out with a 1 pip RKA penetrating attack, if it only has one power.  The attack is so cheap you can layer on Penetrating to overcome any impenetrable.  The reason you can not do it in practice, is the GM says 'No'. 

 

The fact that I can do zero Penetrating body on a 15 points* of KA, and /always/ do one Penetrating body on 5 points of KA means that the system is not just broken, it is flat out WRONG.  That rule has no place in my game.

 

Chris.

 

*Or hell, any number of points if I roll all 1s.

[Sean Waters]

The fact that I can do zero Penetrating body on a 15 points* of KA, and /always/ do one Penetrating body on 5 points of KA means that the system is not just broken, it is flat out WRONG.  That rule has no place in my game.

 

Chris.

 

*Or hell, any number of points if I roll all 1s.

 

I may be, like the system, wrong, but 15 points of KA will always roll at least one Body, won't it?

[Grailknight]

I may be, like the system, wrong, but 15 points of KA will always roll at least one Body, won't it?

 

Yes, but Penetrating makes things quirky. The 1 pip KA always does 1 body(RAW) but a 1/2 die or more count BODY like Normal Attacks so a roll of all !'s on the die do none(assuming the attack is stopped by defenses).

[prestidigitator]

Yes, but Penetrating makes things quirky. The 1 pip KA always does 1 body(RAW) but a 1/2 die or more count BODY like Normal Attacks so a roll of all !'s on the die do none(assuming the attack is stopped by defenses).

Yeah, I always thought that ruling was messed up.  I roll a separate die for the 1-pip and have it do Penetrating damage on a 5 or 6, and similarly only do Pen. damage on a 4, 5, or 6 for a half-die.  It may be extra rolling, but then again someone had to go and apply a cheesy Advantage to their power!  ;-)

[Hyper-Man]

I may be, like the system, wrong, but 15 points of KA will always roll at least one Body, won't it?

 

The comparison was specifically in regards to a KA with the Penetrating Advantage vs. defenses that would otherwise stop the BODY damage without Penetrating.

 

You statement is true only if using some sort of Standard Effect rule.  15 points (before adding Penetrating) is 3 Damage Classes or 1d6K which has a 1 in 6 chance of doing 0 Body vs 7 or higher resistant defenses that do not have the Impenetrable Advantage.

[Sean Waters]

The comparison was specifically in regards to a KA with the Penetrating Advantage vs. defenses that would otherwise stop the BODY damage without Penetrating.

 

You statement is true only if using some sort of Standard Effect rule.  15 points (before adding Penetrating) is 3 Damage Classes or 1d6K which has a 1 in 6 chance of doing 0 Body vs 7 or higher resistant defenses that do not have the Impenetrable Advantage.

 

OK, that clears that up as I had not properly understood how penetrating worked, possibly because I never use penetrating except for silly examples of overpowered powers, and that always uses 1 pip kills, usually with autofire or constant uncontrolled: I still have not found an example of an explanation for a power where Penetrating actually makes sense.

 

So, this OIF FF Killer...