Advantages and the Active Point Cap

[bigdamnhero]

Maybe my comment was misunderstood - my read was that you are prepared to consider a 75 AP multipower provided part of that 75 AP is reduced END for every slot, but are not prepared to consider a 65 AP multipower. I do not find the 65 AP multipower any more "automatically unbalanced" than the 75 AP reduced END MP.

Ah okay, I see what you're coming from. What I was trying to say is that if I set a 60 AP cap (and/or a 12d6 DC cap), and someone wants a 13d6 Blast as their default attack, or a bunch of 65 AP powers (Framework or not) as their baseline power set, then I'm probably going to say no. I listed other examples where I would allow more powerful attacks in specific circumstances or only against certain targets or whatever. But as a baseline, no. Hope that's more clear.

[Hugh Neilson]

Ah okay, I see what you're coming from. What I was trying to say is that if I set a 60 AP cap (and/or a 12d6 DC cap), and someone wants a 13d6 Blast as their default attack, or a bunch of 65 AP powers (Framework or not) as their baseline power set, then I'm probably going to say no. I listed other examples where I would allow more powerful attacks in specific circumstances or only against certain targets or whatever. But as a baseline, no. Hope that's more clear.

Fair enough, and that's how I read it. But you are also prepared to consider a baseline power set based on 75 AP if you are willing to consider a MP of 60 AP powers with 1/2 Endurance added. That's the "inconsistency" I perceive. To me, either the MP of 65 AP powers merits reasonable consideration, or the MP of 75 AP powers including reduced END is a "NO". Now, if that 65 AP MP is a bunch of 13 DC powers when I am looking for a hard or soft 12 DC cap, I doubt I'm going to allow it. But if it's an MP of 65 AP powers that I would have allowed outside the MP (a possibility I have to acknowledge if I am using soft caps), then I'm no more, but no less, willing to allow them in a MP.

[Outsider]

The problem with AP limits on attacks is that HERO characters work by synergy.  How effective a given attack is depends a LOT on what other powers/abilities the character has. 

[Ninja-Bear]

The problem with AP limits on attacks is that HERO characters work by synergy. How effective a given attack is depends a LOT on what other powers/abilities the character has.

I see what you are saying. However I would say your attacks efficiency is more dependant on your opponents defenses. Again for example mental powers are nasty at even low levels if yoir opponent has no defenses against them.

[Outsider]

I was thinking more along the lines of things like the following:

 

1) An attack is a lot more dangerous at 15 OCV than it is at 3 OCV.

2) An attack is a lot more dangerous if the character throwing it has SPD 9 instead of SPD 3.

3) An attack is a lot more dangerous if it costs 0 END, since that SPD 9 guy can then throw it all day without pause.

4) An attack is a lot more dangerous if the character throwing it has Find Weakness also.

and so on.

 

#3 in particular is why I would include any reduced END or improved number of Charges advantages in the AC of an attack for any cap purpose.  A player could get around that by having truly massive END and/or REC stats, but that gets very expensive very fast.

[Mister E]

Should Transdimensional be on the list of Advantages that count for DCs?

 

I don't see Affects Desolid or Affects Real World on the list.

 

I don't see Indirect either.

 

CC p.156

 

A list of attack Advantages that don't count for DCs would be nice.