Incantation Blocker

[Netzilla]

Otherwise, why would it stop there? In Champions games can I force Mentalists to fail by have a CE with -4 EGO rolls? Bricks powers fail unless they make a STR roll at -4? Martial arts fail unless you make a Dex roll at -4?

 

I think you need to decide what works for your games, but that one does not make sense to me. Anti-magic effects are much better bought as either Damage Negation or Dispels for my money.

 

- E

 

Well, if the Martial Artist fails their DEX Roll, then they'll be prone and suffer the resultant penalties.  So, unless they can use their abilities from their back, then yes, their MA will fail if their DEX Roll fails.  Likewise, for the Brick, see option 5 of the Gravity Alteration power in Champions Powers (pg 154).  I can't think of a canonical example for the EGO scenario you posit, but we already have a couple examples that do effectively the same thing for other stat/ability combos.  This seems logical to me since a -X to EGO rolls would represent a sapping of will power, which is a key component of mental powers in Hero.

 

Mechanically, there is no difference by RAW and there should be when that EGO or INT roll was not part of the target's powers. If A paid full points for his powers then B shouldn't be allowed to put a Disadvantage on them without paying for it. CE is too cheap, it should be a Transform.

 

So, would you deny the Ice Sheet's working if the character had bought their running up above the base level?  At that point they've paid points for the Running power.

 

Also, there's other official examples of using Change Environment to impose Limitations that don't already exist.  See a couple of the above examples plus the Turnabout power (Champions Powers pg 185, which imposes the Turn Mode Limitation on powers that don't already have it) and Legion of Attackers (CP pg 230, which imposes Always On and No Conscious Control).

 

I can understand if you think that Change Environment should be more restricted than that, but RAW, these are all legal builds.  The  anti-magic EGO Roll penalty is just an extrapolation of existing CE write-ups.  Ultimately, it is up to Christougher if it works for him, but it is legit RAW. 

[Grailknight]

So, would you deny the Ice Sheet's working if the character had bought their running up above the base level?  At that point they've paid points for the Running power.

 

Also, there's other official examples of using Change Environment to impose Limitations that don't already exist.  See a couple of the above examples plus the Turnabout power (Champions Powers pg 185, which imposes the Turn Mode Limitation on powers that don't already have it) and Legion of Attackers (CP pg 230, which imposes Always On and No Conscious Control).

 

I can understand if you think that Change Environment should be more restricted than that, but RAW, these are all legal builds.  The  anti-magic EGO Roll penalty is just an extrapolation of existing CE write-ups.  Ultimately, it is up to Christougher if it works for him, but it is legit RAW. 

 

I have no problem with the Ice Sheet use. That's something that can be encountered as part of the normal environment.

 

I'm trying to express a fine distinction. CE bought as penalties should make applicable powers harder to use. It should not change how the power functions. The Ice Sheet doesn't take away my ability to stand it just makes it harder as would a naturally occurring Ice Sheet. To actually reduce my running you would have to buy the CE as minuses to my Running Power. It makes it harder to see but I'm not blind to everything because of CE, I just don't perceive as well.

 

 It should affect active uses of an ability not take away passive states as if it were an AVAD Drain. The CE power says it shouldn't be used to simulate Drain or other Powers at a reduced cost(and makes a specific ruling for movement powers). Forcing a roll should be disallowed by the Metarule that Defenses should be less expensive than the Attacks they apply against. At -1 for 3 points, CE is less expensive than buying up DC's in any power because it takes 5 points to counter that penalty.

[Netzilla]

You have the right to that opinion on CE and limit it accordingly in your game (though I think being aboe to limit your own game should go without saying). I'm just stating that the RAW and official examples provided allow the use of CE to limit the target's ability to use affected powers powers and impose new Limitations.

[Hugh Neilson]

It's not the penalty to a required roll, it's the ability to force a roll at penalties where one wasn't required before.

 

Basically this gives CE the ability to give any of the targets powers the Requires a Roll Disadvantage at penalties. At -1 per 3 points, that's a 9 or less roll to any 50 Active Point power(more for smaller powers) for 30 Active points of CE.

 

I think that's out of the scope of CE and more inline with a Severe Transform.

  

Mechanically, there is no difference by RAW and there should be when that EGO or INT roll was not part of the target's powers. If A paid full points for his powers then B shouldn't be allowed to put a Disadvantage on them without paying for it. CE is too cheap, it should be a Transform.

Netzilla covers it nicely - it is RAW. I would also ask why it should be possible to use CE to cancel out a melee combatant's abilities (he slips and falls, so he can't close to attack range; all the points spent on ground-based movement are also negated) but not to cancel out a spellcaster's abilities.

[eepjr24]

I disagree for a couple reasons. The first is that it clearly states in the rules that the interactions and how they work are up to the GM, so there is nothing saying that an INT roll means spells fail or EGO means all mental powers fail.

The GM should be prepared to rule on the interaction between Change Environment and other Powers based on the type of effect generated by the Change Environment, the special effects of the two Powers, and similar factors.

Second, it also clearly states that CE should not be used to emulate other powers.

Characters cannot use Change Environment to duplicate existing Powers.

I think the type of thing you are talking about here is a Supress or Drain, not a Change Environment.

 

In any case, I don't think either of us will be changing our minds based on the arguments made here. I did make a post in the rules forum to see if Steve can provide guidance.

 

- E

[Netzilla]

 

Second, it also clearly states that CE should not be used to emulate other powers.

I think the type of thing you are talking about here is a Supress or Drain, not a Change Environment.

 

I would disagree that this is a Suppress or Drain effect as it's not actually doing the same thing. 

 

A Suppress or Drain reduces the Active Points of the affected power, thereby, reducing the Effect of the power.  In other words, a 12d6 Firebolt Suppressed or Drained by 20 points becomes an 8d6 Firebolt.  In addition, the Drain stays with you until it fades even if you're no longer directly or indirectly targeted by the Drain.  The only counter to that is to have Power Defense. 

 

The CE is imposing something similar to the Requires a Roll Limitation at -X (though there's no AP penalty involved).  The power, if the roll is successful, still works at full power.  If the target has a sufficiently high Char Roll, then they're more likely to succeed than not.  A wizard with an 18 EGO has a 13- roll.  If the CE imposes a -3 penalty, that wizard still has a 50% chance to make the spell work (even higher if he takes extra time or manages to accrue some other bonus).  If the roll is unsuccessful, the power fails.  However, the next time that Firebolt is tried, the character rolls again and may actually succeed.  Additionally, if they manage to get out from under the effect (move out of the area), they no longer need to make the roll.  The lack of Active Point interaction and its all-or-nothing nature makes this unlike an Adjustment Power, and the lack of a fade rate makes this more unlike Drain.

[eepjr24]

The CE is imposing something similar to the Requires a Roll Limitation at -X (though there's no AP penalty involved).  The power, if the roll is successful, still works at full power.  If the target has a sufficiently high Char Roll, then they're more likely to succeed than not.  A wizard with an 18 EGO has a 13- roll.  If the CE imposes a -3 penalty, that wizard still has a 50% chance to make the spell work (even higher if he takes extra time or manages to accrue some other bonus).  If the roll is unsuccessful, the power fails.  However, the next time that Firebolt is tried, the character rolls again and may actually succeed.  Additionally, if they manage to get out from under the effect (move out of the area), they no longer need to make the roll.  The lack of Active Point interaction and its all-or-nothing nature makes this unlike an Adjustment Power, and the lack of a fade rate makes this more unlike Drain.

I like that analogy. APG1, 82 has rules for that:

 

The GM determines the combat effect cost of  imposing a Limitation, but typically it’s a 5 Character Point combat effect per -¼ worth of Limitation imposed.

So you can use Change Environment to add a Requires a Roll: 11- (-1/2) for 10 points, per power that you want to effect. That seems quite balanced to me, point wise. If you want something broader, no problem, apply Expanded Effect or Variable Effect advantages to it. 

 

- E

 

Edit: Formatting

Edited August 3, 2016 by eepjr24

[Grailknight]

I would disagree that this is a Suppress or Drain effect as it's not actually doing the same thing. 

 

A Suppress or Drain reduces the Active Points of the affected power, thereby, reducing the Effect of the power.  In other words, a 12d6 Firebolt Suppressed or Drained by 20 points becomes an 8d6 Firebolt.  In addition, the Drain stays with you until it fades even if you're no longer directly or indirectly targeted by the Drain.  The only counter to that is to have Power Defense. 

 

CE is more similar to a Suppress than a Drain but given that there is no Active Point difference between the two, you can use either for comparison here.

 

To Suppress or Drain 20 Active Points from that 12d6 Firebolt would be a 60 Active Point Power. The wizard is less effective but still gets some use from his power. He would have to be hit by this twice or more to be rendered totally powerless.

 

 

The CE is imposing something similar to the Requires a Roll Limitation at -X (though there's no AP penalty involved).  The power, if the roll is successful, still works at full power.  If the target has a sufficiently high Char Roll, then they're more likely to succeed than not.  A wizard with an 18 EGO has a 13- roll.  If the CE imposes a -3 penalty, that wizard still has a 50% chance to make the spell work (even higher if he takes extra time or manages to accrue some other bonus).  If the roll is unsuccessful, the power fails.  However, the next time that Firebolt is tried, the character rolls again and may actually succeed.  Additionally, if they manage to get out from under the effect (move out of the area), they no longer need to make the roll.  The lack of Active Point interaction and its all-or-nothing nature makes this unlike an Adjustment Power, and the lack of a fade rate makes this more unlike Drain.

 

Your example uses a 9 Active Point CE and takes the wizard from an 80 percent chance to a 50 percent chance.

 

Using the equivalent 60 Active Points in CE makes the roll a -7 or less. So no possibility of using the power without large bonuses or moving 10 steps up the time chart just to get a chance at a roll of a 3.

 

Let's use half those Active Points. A 30 point CE means that wizard needs to roll a 3 to use his 60 Active Point power so from 80 percent to .5 percent chance.

 

Though it follows RAW, I can't find equivalence here. I keep coming back to:CC page 53

 

"Change Environment should not do as much damage, or have as strong an effect, as a similar Power for the same amount of CP. The GM should establish a maximum effect for Change Environment (or change its cost) if necessary for game balance."

 

That's also RAW. There seems to be a conflict here that everyone can(and should) resolve to their own interpretation of RAW and game balance.

 

Was this power discussed by SETAC? It did undergo several changes in the transition.

[Netzilla]

There were a few discussions of CE in the SETAC group and specifically the idea of using CE to inflict Limitations on a target's powers.  A large part of the discussion of CE centered around using it to do things there really was no other good way to already do in the Hero System and forcing Char Rolls to do certain things is one of those effects (along with Suffocation and the like).  I don't recall if exact costs were ever discussed, but I don't recall being significantly involved in the CE discussion, personally.

 

Of note, 6eV1 has the following lines in the Change Environment description:

 

 

 

The GM may limit how much of a negative modifier or other effect characters can create with Change Environment.

 

 

 

 

 

If necessary the GM should adjust the cost of a Change Environment power to ensure that it doesn’t unbalance the game.

 

 

 

I haven't checked CC to see if those same lines should be carried over.

 

Also, I'll agree that certain effects of CE should probably be Warning or Stop Sign powers (especially in large quantities).  However, many things in Hero are pretty easily abused.  So, CE being one of them is nothing new.  It just means that a GM should look askance at any power build that includes a CE with a -10 char roll.  Quite frankly, I'd deny anything that got beyond a -3 in a heroic level game and probably cap super-heroic at -4 or -5.

[Hugh Neilson]

CE is more similar to a Suppress than a Drain but given that there is no Active Point difference between the two, you can use either for comparison here.

The Suppress benefits from a -1/2 limitation, so it is cheaper. In many FH games, this reduced cost is more relevant than is typically the case, as frameworks are not used so AP is less crucial.

 

Suppress and Drain can keep lowering the target’s points, where the CE cannot be strengthened by using it again. They can also reduce or shut down a spell which has already been cast, but has long-term effects (Constant powers, the Lingering advantage), where the CE as defined is only relevant to the initial casting. There is no chance a Suppressed or Drained ability will suddenly be usable at full effect, where this is the result where the CE roll succeeds.

 

Practically, I rarely ever see a character spend points to Drain or Suppress a specific power. Draining or Suppressing specific characteristics is much more common. Draining 20 INT or EGO will not just impede spellcasting – it will crush the typical warrior or rogue, and many spellcasters besides. Suppressing a spellcasting skill seems like it would be hugely debilitating (how many FH magic systems always have Requires a Skill Roll on all spells?).

 

"Change Environment should not do as much damage, or have as strong an effect, as a similar Power for the same amount of CP. The GM should establish a maximum effect for Change Environment (or change its cost) if necessary for the game balance."

I think this speaks to Netzilla’s comment that we simply do not allow a 60 AP CE where those points do nothing but boost the penalty to the stat. Similarly, in a game where 60 AP attacks are common, 60 AP spells purchasing defenses are not so readily allowed.

 

Was this power discussed by SETAC? It did undergo several changes in the transition.

Like Netzilla, I mainly recall discussions of using CE for effects not readily simulated, much of which wound up in APG. I don’t recall any costing discussions, and I think the changes were largely focused on making the base for most attack powers a single target, at range, to reduce the AP disparity for “Ranged” vs “No Range”, and AoE.

 

To the RAW and RAI, it seems like the Confusion spell in the sidebar in 6eV1p176 (-4 to INT rolls and INT based skill rolls) is a lot more devastating than -4 specifically to focus, recall or whatever to a sufficient extent to cast a spell. The former will impact all characters, while warriors and rogues laugh at a spell suppression power.

[Hugh Neilson]

I haven't checked CC to see if those same lines should be carried over.

I will guess no, but only because a lot of the "GM should monitor/GM may allow or disallow" comments in 6e were removed in favour of a blanket statement on GM review to reduce word count, IIRC.

[Grailknight]

Adding Stop and Warning signs seems like the best solution. I just wish there was some way to add examples of "what not to do" in some type of errata document. 

 

Maybe I'll start a thread for this when I have time.

[Steve]

Hmmm... based on the above comments, does this mean that Change Environment could be used to add Extra Time to an ability that doesn't already have it as a Limitation? Making combat spells take a Turn to cast would really hamstring a mage.

[Netzilla]

Hmmm... based on the above comments, does this mean that Change Environment could be used to add Extra Time to an ability that doesn't already have it as a Limitation? Making combat spells take a Turn to cast would really hamstring a mage.

The APG does have further rules for imposing Limitations (mentioned earlier upthread). Again, that would be another one that should set off warning signs for the GM. On the other hand, imposing a Delayed Phase, Full Phase or Extra Phase doesn't seem unreasonable off the bat.

[Netzilla]

Adding Stop and Warning signs seem like the best solution. I just wish there was some way to add examples of "what not to do" in some type of errata document. 

 

Maybe I'll start a thread for this when I have time.

 

The Hero System is a game that does require some extra legwork on the part of the GM and learning to spot potentially abusive builds is an acquired skill.  It's an unfortunate side effect of making the system as flexible as it is.  OTOH, munchkins gonna munch no matter the game system.

[Hugh Neilson]

Funny..in many RPG's, the expressed complaint is that the "muggles" are at a huge disadvantage compared to spellcasters. Here, we discuss an ability that would be harmful to the spellcasters*, but many posters think this unfair to the casters.

 

* Albeit in a form that spellcasters would largely access it, but a magic item could be acquired by non-spellcasters in many such settings. Imagine an AoE, 16 meter radius CE Stone with no range,  A warrior could certainly carry that lucky charm around to ward off vile wizards.

 

It's something of a build seeking an SFX.  I'd look to fine tune it for any given game/magic system.  Further, if your magic system has environmental issues (eg. Mana drawn from the world around you), thinking about CE effects to simulate other environments that impact magic seems like it would enrich that setting, similar to creating wild and dead magic zones in some D&D settings.

[eepjr24]

Funny..in many RPG's, the expressed complaint is that the "muggles" are at a huge disadvantage compared to spellcasters. Here, we discuss an ability that would be harmful to the spellcasters*, but many posters think this unfair to the casters.

 

* Albeit in a form that spellcasters would largely access it, but a magic item could be acquired by non-spellcasters in many such settings. Imagine an AoE, 16 meter radius CE Stone with no range,  A warrior could certainly carry that lucky charm around to ward off vile wizards.

 

It's something of a build seeking an SFX.  I'd look to fine tune it for any given game/magic system.  Further, if your magic system has environmental issues (eg. Mana drawn from the world around you), thinking about CE effects to simulate other environments that impact magic seems like it would enrich that setting, similar to creating wild and dead magic zones in some D&D settings.

I think most RPG's don't have bought powers in the same way that Hero does. When you have paid points for something, you want to make sure that something which affects it is costed properly.

 

That's why I really like the limitation adding CE, instead of the generic "Force a roll to whatever the hell you want" for 3 points. It seems balanced, fits the build and could work in many different SFX. I actually kind of like the stone idea, I may build a set of those for my game. Maybe as rune carved ivory game pieces?

 

- E

[eepjr24]

And here is Steve's interpretation, if anyone is still following along.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93873-change-environment-for-power-disruption/

[Hugh Neilson]

I think Steve nicely summarizes the thread.

 

It's an "interesting and potentially useful possibility" which "may raise game balance issues". The GM would want to impose reasonable limits on such a power (Steve suggests the types of limits he would want to see), which is the same with pretty much any power (although for many the limits present by RAW cover it).

 

Now I am really confused as to how the Confusion Spell sample power in 6e is intended to work. It doesn't say what, if any, impact a roll imposed on all affected has, only that it imposes -4 to all INT rolls. It seems like imposing a roll (like an Ice Sheet) is more powerful than just penalizing rolls made for other purposes - maybe there should be an added price for imposing a roll (or a reduction for only penalizing rolls made for other reasons).

[Christougher]

If all you're looking for is to make it harder to cast, Hugh Nelson had a pretty good suggestion on another thread:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93779-suffocation-change-environnement/page-4?do=findComment&comment=2522911

 

I'm not looking for 'harder to cast' per se like that - yes, that's good, but not what I meant.  

 

If a spell already has Gestures, then a Grab or Entangle prevents it, due to the existing limitation.  In my fantasy world, each style of magic has a different specified set of required limitations.  I'm looking for effects/powers which capitalize on pre-existing limitations.

 

Chris.

[Netzilla]

I'm not looking for 'harder to cast' per se like that - yes, that's good, but not what I meant.  

 

If a spell already has Gestures, then a Grab or Entangle prevents it, due to the existing limitation.  In my fantasy world, each style of magic has a different specified set of required limitations.  I'm looking for effects/powers which capitalize on pre-existing limitations.

 

Chris.

Hard to answer that one without knowing what the pre-existing limitations are.

[Chris Goodwin]

Wow.  Late to this party...

 

6e2 p. 10:  Voice as a "Sense".  Explicitly states that voices are silenced by Darkness that affects the Hearing Group, and says it's worth 25 points as a Power.  Which means it can also be Drained, Suppressed, etc.

[IndianaJoe3]

Wow.  Late to this party...

 

6e2 p. 10:  Voice as a "Sense".  Explicitly states that voices are silenced by Darkness that affects the Hearing Group, and says it's worth 25 points as a Power.  Which means it can also be Drained, Suppressed, etc.

 

No, that is explicitly forbidden (6e1 209).

[Chris Goodwin]

No, that is explicitly forbidden (6e1 209).

 

So it is.  The Darkness part is called out, though, so it still stands.