Entangles on other CHA

[Ellis]

Yeah, I think we're going to call this guy a Mentalist, he'll have Mind Control and Drains and the like.

[Andrew Cermak]

Originally posted by Rene

Totally agree. Why overcomplicate things when there are easy solutions at hand?

 

Maybe because the "overcomplications" actually allow for some interesting power constructs that can't otherwise be easily duplicated.

 

With an Entangle based on INT (for example, a logical conundrum the character is compelled to solve before he can take any physical action), other characters could help "guide" the victim to a solution (ie making INT based "attacks" on the Entangle). With a PRE based Entangle (say, paralyzing fear), a commanding ally could "snap him out of it" with a PRE attack against the Entangle. These are interesting dynamics that would be hard to represent with Mind Control.

 

An idea that I find most intriguing is an Entangle that is affected by two or more characteristics. Perhaps an entangling rope attack could be escaped with STR or DEX. Or, if the Puzzlemaster traps you in one of his Giant Rubiks Cubes, you *could* simply bust out with STR, or you could solve the puzzle with INT and thereby force it to release you.

 

Yeah, I think there's a lot of interesting possibilities there. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of Entangles against alternate CHA out of hand.

[trechriron]

Re: Entangles on other CHA

 

Originally posted by Ellis

I'm a mean GM, apparently, for disallowing a PC to have an Entangle that uses non-STR CHA to get out of (ie: Entangle vs INT).

 

Has anyone actually allowed this?

 

No, you’re a smart GM.

 

I will not allow “mechanics†based character constructs of any kind in a game without some story-based or description-based reason. If the player comes to me with this really great idea, and an INT based Entangle fits the bill, so be it. But to come to me with that cheesy-grin exclaiming at the top of your lungs that you have found the penultimate attack that NO ONE will beat, is a sure fire way to get "red-flagged" for the GMS audit. (Game Master Service).

 

Ask an important question. Can I see your character concept?

 

When the player starts to sputter and then tries to concoct an explanation on the spot. Veto it on a matter of principle and then make this person create a concept before you will allow them to crack a book.

 

Just because the system will allow you to do anything you want does not mean you should, or that the GM will allow it.

 

Don’t let experienced Hero Players dictate to you how you want your game to be ran. Just because they know six different ways to build the coolest power with very little points that can destroy the whole universe does not mean they are right. Smart perhaps, but not right. I am constantly impressed at the sheer genius some of my experienced Hero players come up with stuff. I still don’t allow it if it seems broken or unbalanced. If you don’t like it, don’t allow it, even if the rules say it is possible. It is your game after all. If you feel that is a bit heavy-handed, then ask them to justify it story-wise. At least you will have something to work with in the context of the game and not be victimized by the raw mechanics.

 

Just my two cents...

[Ellis]

I love your two cents so much, Trentin, I'm copying it and showing it to the players. You've written it better than I could ever explain to people, about the difference bewteen what can be done versus what should be done. Thanks

[trechriron]

You are most certainly welcome!

 

[Legendsmiths]

I'll second that notion. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

 

Here, here.