Jump to content

Invisibility to Hearing Group


Rhino

Recommended Posts

the leaves make noise (or don't) regardless of your range.

 

 

Well the footsteps you leave behind in the snow are outside your range as well.  the truth is, invisibility vs sight has range effects as well.  The item I put in my pocket or hold in my hand is invisible.  When I throw it or put it down away from me, its not.  Same deal with inaudibility; I can trigger sounds distant from my immediate personal influence but not that I'm holding or contacting.

 

InVISibility can leave long lasting marks.  InAUDibility is always transitory and short term, so its effects are different. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 147
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Except there's all the difference in the world- one is a floor which the PC can sprint across and make no noise, and the other is a situation in which they are breaking things. The leaves are the same scenario as the floorboard breaking.

 

It's interesting that in your devil's advocate post, which you agreed with pretty much all of my examples of why Taylor's position is incorrect... that Taylor liked it as if he agreed. All those things that you agreed with... are the opposite of his position as articulated so far.

 

 

Also, bizarrely- no one has said that walking or running or doing jumping jacks across a hardwood floor should make noise. It would be extremely helpful if we could dispense with that straw man.

 

And while it might not be worth any points to silence your corduroy pants (I don't know that I've ever worn the material so I can't speak to how loud it is)... the example I offered is worth quite a few points. Being able to march around in full armor, clanking up and down stairs, drawing swords and (maybe?) attacking people in virtual silence is extremely useful. I can be fully armed and armored, sneaking up on/past guards with my overflowing treasure pouch on my hip jangling away... and make no noise.

 

Give me the ability to do that to a dozen knights, and in a night raid (har har, pun opportunity) I could take a over a castle as my troops march in under the cover of darkness and through the corridors of the castle. Very useful, worth some points.

Let me be that guy. I did wood floor work for twenty years. You make a lot of noise is you sprint across one. A ton of noise. A tonne for our Canadian friends. It makes absolutely no difference if it is a new one or an old one(I did a lot of antique work). Further, new floors creak a lot as well. Old houses that still exist were often built well, New houses, well, if they are built well, they are generally built by the one contractor in town whose company does that kind of work.

 

The sound of footfalls on hard wood at a sprint gives huge warning signs, not just the sound, which is substantial, but the vibration.

 

Yes, being able to walk in armor silently is an advantage that costs points. The issue is, in the realm of what points it's worth, it's on the same system that allows 15D6 blasts, killing attacks, mind control, etc. In that realm, not so many points.

 

Regardless, if it doesn't cost covering the sound of leaves one steps on, it shouldn't, by any means, cover sprinting on hard wood floors. A hard wood floor is, in essence, a drum, and produces sound that reaches much further than stepping on a leaf. Pound on it, it will make a lot of noise, and sprinting is exactly the sort of noise that is the loudest. Unless it's a basement, where there's no chamber beneath is to act as a drum. And people who put hard wood floors in their basements are only marginally better than house painters because they are paying for it, in the eyes of floor guys.

 

It's a bit of a bait and switch, imo, if one doesn't cover the sound of stepping on leaves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone very close or with an exceptional perception roll can hear faint noises or echoey sounds; the silence isn't perfect.

 

Stepping on a long branch and the dry leaves rustling.

Great examples - I don't need to add any, nor do I think I could come up with better ones.

 

There's no range aspect with Invisibility - the leaves make noise (or don't) regardless of your range. Invisible PCs effects (footprints) aren't more visible at range - their cloaks aren't somewhat visible if they are really long, versus those PCs with just shortcloaks.

 

He leaves footprints. Are the prints he is still standing in visible? I believe RAW does not say, and getting to a spot in the middle of the snow or mud does not seem practical without passing through it. Certainly it is infrequent enough that it hardly impacts the value of invisibility.

 

Well the footsteps you leave behind in the snow are outside your range as well.  the truth is, invisibility vs sight has range effects as well.  The item I put in my pocket or hold in my hand is invisible.  When I throw it or put it down away from me, its not.  Same deal with inaudibility; I can trigger sounds distant from my immediate personal influence but not that I'm holding or contacting.

 

InVISibility can leave long lasting marks.  InAUDibility is always transitory and short term, so its effects are different. 

 

 A very good point. In fact, the staccato of high heels on hardwood would tend to reverberate and resonate far more than the crunch of dry leaves underfoot.

 

Let me be that guy. I did wood floor work for twenty years. You make a lot of noise is you sprint across one. A ton of noise. A tonne for our Canadian friends. It makes absolutely no difference if it is a new one or an old one(I did a lot of antique work). Further, new floors creak a lot as well. Old houses that still exist were often built well, New houses, well, if they are built well, they are generally built by the one contractor in town whose company does that kind of work.

 

The sound of footfalls on hard wood at a sprint gives huge warning signs, not just the sound, which is substantial, but the vibration.

As a point of order, sound is caused by vibrations. It seems reasonable to interpret invisibility to sound stilling those vibrations. In close proximity, there may still be enough brief vibration to sense (Fringe) if the invisibility is imperfect. In fact, I believe that's the comic book science behind Black Panther's vibranium-soled footgear, as vibranium cancels out kinetic energy including the vibrations that create sound.

 

Regardless, if it doesn't cost covering the sound of leaves one steps on, it shouldn't, by any means, cover sprinting on hard wood floors. A hard wood floor is, in essence, a drum, and produces sound that reaches much further than stepping on a leaf. Pound on it, it will make a lot of noise, and sprinting is exactly the sort of noise that is the loudest. Unless it's a basement, where there's no chamber beneath is to act as a drum. And people who put hard wood floors in their basements are only marginally better than house painters because they are paying for it, in the eyes of floor guys.

In my view, the above makes the "realism" of cancelling the crunch of the leaves vs the sprint across hardwood clear. If we want the leaves to crunch, then, it should be for the same game balance reasons as having that sword appear in mid-air for a period of time after an attack. To me, there is no real game balance issue - invisibility to sound is not game-breaking if the crunch of falling leaves is silenced. It makes logical sense and it makes dramatic sense, and I agree it seems a reasonable expectation (ie not cancelling the leaves is a bait & switch). So, at least in my game, the leaves should be quiet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the "silent armor" question, what happens if an enemy detects the invisible character, swings and is blocked by his shield? Does the invisibility work because the sound is made by the shield he wears, or fail because the sound is caused by the mace crashing into it? I'm inclined to give the nod to the power and say the shield remains silent, again because this does not seem overpowered.

 

I am also thinking that, comparing Invisibility and Darkness, the Invisibility should grant benefits comparable to the same points spent on a small Darkness field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Invisibility to Hearing by itself kinda sucks.  It makes you invisible to targeting sense that most people don't have (sonar).  It hides the sound of your heartbeat, but most people don't have the ability to hear that anyway, even in a supers game.  It hides the sound of your breathing, but unless you're breathing really heavily most people can't hear that either.  It makes you super-quiet, but most people already have the ability to be relatively quiet.  The rules don't assign any noise penalties to walking around in a suit of armor, or running on creaky floors, or anything like that.  That sort of thing isn't even addressed.  So those penalties are left up to the GM.  Is walking over a creaky floor a -2 to stealth rolls or something?  +2 to an opponent's hearing perception check?  GM decision.

 

So what does the power give you?  It prevents someone else's super-hearing from working on you, but that's really just a counter to something another guy might or might not have.  Against normal people, the only thing it would really provide would be quiet movement.  Because of that, I can't see any reason why it *wouldn't*

 

This is why special effects are incredibly important.  I think most people on the board discount the value of them.  But the really should be used to determine something like this.  Let's look at some possible sfx of invisibility vs hearing.

 

1)  Sound control powers.  Rockstar has the mutant ability to produce and control sound.  He's got a sonic blast, a flash vs hearing, a force wall (wall of sound), a drain vs dex (causes inner ear problems), absorption vs sonic effects, and invisibility vs hearing.  His body can absorb sound waves in his immediate area, sucking the sound into his body.

 

2)  Super-stealth.  Ninjaboy is trained in the ancient secrets of the orient.  He can control his breathing, his heartbeat, and he has a super-lightfoot ability to move silently.

 

3)  Boots of silence.  Magnus the warrior took the magic boots off of an elf that he killed.  It allows him to magically make no noise at all when he moves.

 

 

So there are 3 different special effects for the same power.  I don't think any of them should really make sound when they step on dry leaves.  Rockstar would absorb the sound generated by the leaves.  They're in close enough proximity that the sound waves are absorbed into his body.  Ninjaboy has such amazing stealth abilities that he doesn't step on the leaves.  His amazing body control and skill allows him to step where the leaves aren't.  Running on his toes, he zigzags across the ground like an anime character, every time finding that one spot that is safe to plant his foot.  Meanwhile, Magnus the warrior just plunges right through the leaves, the magic of the boots causing it to be completely silent.

 

Now, what about the equivalent of throwing a blanket on somebody?  Covering them with sawdust, or looking for their footprints in the snow?  The difference here, is those are all active ways to search for someone.  The require clever thinking (or at least they originally required clever thinking), and they're very sfx dependent.  What works against one invisible guy might not work against another.  You can throw sawdust on the Invisible Man, but that won't work against The Shadow, who clouds men's minds so they do not see him.  Of course, The Shadow would set off an electronic sensor, and could probably be seen on video after the fact, where the Invisible Man wouldn't.

 

Dry leaves, however, do not seem particularly clever or inventive.  That's not an active way to search for someone.  It's not a creative way to get around their power, like the sawdust, or setting off the sprinklers to see the water splash on their body.  Dry leaves being on the ground, or a squeaky floor, seems like exactly the kind of thing that Invis vs hearing is designed to get around as part of its basic abilities.  Dry leaves seems like a normal environmental condition that should be bypassed by the power.  Now, how could you get around Invis vs hearing?  What clever things are the equivalent to throwing sawdust on someone?  How about:

 

--A string with cans tied to it.  You bump into the string, it rattles the cans.  Ninjaboy's super-stealth power probably lets him bypass that no problem.  He automatically steps over the string without a problem.  But Rockstar's sound absorption doesn't extend that far.  He absorbs sound in the immediate area, not 10 feet away where the cans are clanging.

--Tacks on the floor.  You step on them, it hurts.  It's unexpected, so you make an Ego roll or you go "ouch!"  Now Rockstar's power absorbs that sound, so he stays silent.  But Magnus, who has made clear in the course of play that he can have a conversation or shout things out while wearing his magic boots, he is susceptible to this.  He can make inadvertent noises even while inaudible.

 

 

Remember, all these guys paid points for Invisibility.  They should generally get the full benefit of that.  The times when it can be bypassed by something that their opponent didn't pay points for should be rare and situation-specific.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, and that's valid and according to the rules.  Its just that they paid points to be invisible.  Which is the entire point of the power: to act and move without being sensed.  So I think that should cover the source of their powers, if not the effects.

I agree as well, if only because I don't feel like having the "What do you mean I have to buy IPE for my attacks even when I'm invisible?" conversation with my players. Depending on sfx I can see the bullet/laser beam/etc becoming visible as it leaves the gun. I could even see giving a nearby observer a bonus to their PER Roll to spot the character's Fringe. But the idea that gun itself becomes visible when I fire it feels like a leftover D&Dism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the "silent armor" question, what happens if an enemy detects the invisible character, swings and is blocked by his shield? Does the invisibility work because the sound is made by the shield he wears, or fail because the sound is caused by the mace crashing into it? I'm inclined to give the nod to the power and say the shield remains silent, again because this does not seem overpowered.

 

I am also thinking that, comparing Invisibility and Darkness, the Invisibility should grant benefits comparable to the same points spent on a small Darkness field.

Since the Shield is a defensive power it's not game breaking for it to not make sound when struck.

 

It is pretty game breaking for someone who doesn't have Invisible power effects to be able to hit someone without that person seeing the attack. I have no issue with someone with a Obvious Attack Focus to keep that item invisible before it's used, but the defender MUST be able to see the attack to know where it originated from. Even Mental Powers which are invisible ex for the person being attacked work that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

re Sonar. Because it's a Targeting Sense, the Invisible person must have Invisible vs a Targeting Sense (20pts per sense, vs 10 pts per non targeting sense) to remain invisible to Sonar.

Invis to hearing Otherwise makes the person not make noise. both to body noises that would be picked up by ultrasonic and telescoping hearing and the noises they make by walking etc.

Not sure that I LIKE how Invisibility is bought Targeting vs Non Targeting in 6e. I think I liked buying it vs the Rarity of the Sense more. Targeting vs non targeting makes for a very expensive power. It also causes anomolies in things like RADAR ie isn't radar pretty much ALWAYS a targeting sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

re Sonar. Because it's a Targeting Sense, the Invisible person must have Invisible vs a Targeting Sense (20pts per sense, vs 10 pts per non targeting sense) to remain invisible to Sonar.

 

Yeah I dealt with that above.  Invisibility vs sound (Inaudibility) costs less not because it isn't against a targeting sense, but because it is against a sense that is very rarely targeted -- like all things in Hero, the lower the value and more narrow the applicability, the cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the Shield is a defensive power it's not game breaking for it to not make sound when struck.

 

It is pretty game breaking for someone who doesn't have Invisible power effects to be able to hit someone without that person seeing the attack. I have no issue with someone with a Obvious Attack Focus to keep that item invisible before it's used, but the defender MUST be able to see the attack to know where it originated from. Even Mental Powers which are invisible ex for the person being attacked work that way.

 

I think there are some consistency problems with the official rulings on this.  I never liked the idea of a gun or a sword becoming visible -- it seemed like a gut reaction answer that was later made official.  Let's look at some different powers and maybe I can explain.

 

--60 Str, giving a 12D6 attack (covered by regular invisibility)

--40 Str, +4D6 offensive strike, giving a 12D6 attack (covered by regular invisibility)

--20 Str, +8D6 hand attack "super punch" giving a 12D6 attack (maybe covered by regular invisibility?)

--20 Str +8D6 hand attack OAF "magic hammer" giving a 12D6 attack (NOT covered by regular invisibility)

--12D6 energy blast, no range "super punch" (not covered by regular invisibility)

--4D6 HKA claws (covered by regular invisibility)

--4D6 HKA OAF sword (not covered by regular invisibility)

--4D6 HKA OIHID sword (maybe covered by regular invisibility?)

--4D6 HKA energy sword with no limitation (maybe covered by regular invisibility?)

--12D6 energy blast, no limitations (not covered by regular invisibility)

 

What you end up with are a lot of different powers that, while very similar rule-wise, are affected differently by the Invisibility power.

 

I also dislike the idea of the weapon suddenly becoming visible.  That honestly feels like a D&D-ism that made the transition to Hero.  While it might be appropriate for some weapons to become visible, a longsword appearing in midair just because you make an attack roll doesn't seem right.  That might make sense for a just-activated lightsaber, but not a regular sword.  I'd say it's more accurate to the spirit of the rules to say that attacks are generally observable unless they are bought with the IPE advantage. This doesn't mean that a sword has to appear, floating in midair.  It just means that the player needs to come up with some description for how the attack can be perceived.  For a gun, I'd say it's fine for the weapon to remain perfectly invisible, but there's still a muzzle flash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I dealt with that above.  Invisibility vs sound (Inaudibility) costs less not because it isn't against a targeting sense, but because it is against a sense that is very rarely targeted -- like all things in Hero, the lower the value and more narrow the applicability, the cheaper.

So no you didn't cover it. It's obvious that you haven't read the rule. 6e1 pg 236 CCpg 72 and 5ER pg 192

Yes, but SOMETIMES it IS a Targeting sense. ie Sonar, and it is possible to buy Hearing with the Targeting Adder. In 6e you would have to spend 20 points to be invisible to Targeting Hearing Senses. Though once you are invis to one Targeting sense group you can get others for 10pts each. So to know if the PC is invisible to Sonar and other Hearing Targeting senses, you would have to know how the PC bought their invisibility to sound. Whether they bought invis to a Targeting or a Non Targeting sense.

 

It has Zero to do with Rarity. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I dealt with that above.  Invisibility vs sound (Inaudibility) costs less not because it isn't against a targeting sense, but because it is against a sense that is very rarely targeted -- like all things in Hero, the lower the value and more narrow the applicability, the cheaper.

 

So no you didn't cover it. It's obvious that you haven't read the rule. 6e1 pg 236 CCpg 72 and 5ER pg 192

Yes, but SOMETIMES it IS a Targeting sense. ie Sonar, and it is possible to buy Hearing with the Targeting Adder. In 6e you would have to spend 20 points to be invisible to Targeting Hearing Senses. Though once you are invis to one Targeting sense group you can get others for 10pts each. So to know if the PC is invisible to Sonar and other Hearing Targeting senses, you would have to know how the PC bought their invisibility to sound. Whether they bought invis to a Targeting or a Non Targeting sense.

 

It has Zero to do with Rarity.

Hmmm...this is a really interesting question. I think RAW is actually fairly ambiguous here and I can see how each of you are interpreting it the way you are. 6e1 p239 talks about Targeting Sense Groups vs Nontargeting Sense Groups. But there's not really any such thing as Sense Groups being Targeting or Nontargeting - those are defined/bought by individual Senses. So it doesn't really make any sense to talk about Targeting/Nontargeting Sense Groups, only Targeting/Nontargeting Senses. That said, 90% of the time most Sight Group Senses are Targeting Senses, while most other Sense Group Senses tend to be mainly Nontargeting. Obviously there are odd effects around the periphery, but for most human characters that's the way it usually breaks down.

 

Tasha's interpretation is that if you buy Invisibility vs Hearing for 10 points, then it applies to all Hearing Sense that are Nontargeting, but any Hearing Senses bought as Targeting would be able to hear you. That actually seems to make the most sense as written, but it gets into some wonkiness in that buying Invis vs Targeting Hearing Senses costs the same as Invis vs Targeting Sight Senses, even tho the latter are a thousand times more common.

 

CT's interpretation is that what Steve meant to say was that since Sight Group Senses are usually Targeting, then Invisibility vs Sight Group costs 20 points, and that since Hearing Group Senses are usually Nontargeting, then Invisibility vs Hearing Group costs 10 points; and further that the latter would work even against Hearing Group Senses that happen to be Targeting.

 

I think Tasha's interpretation is closer to the letter of RAW - tho someone would have to Ask Steve if that's what he meant or not. But personally I feel like CT's interpretation is better balanced, makes more sense, and is less likely to create confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is pretty game breaking for someone who doesn't have Invisible power effects to be able to hit someone without that person seeing the attack. I have no issue with someone with a Obvious Attack Focus to keep that item invisible before it's used, but the defender MUST be able to see the attack to know where it originated from.

Agreed. Tho RAW specifically says that an attacker's fists don't become visible when attacking - which would make even less sense than a sword suddenly becoming visible. So does that mean I don't have a way to fight back against the brick or martial artist that just hit me?

 

I think the key is that the attack becomes visible in some way and that the defender (at least) has a chance to retaliate. But that doesn't have to mean the weapon itself becomes visible. I'm making this up as I go because honestly I don't remember this coming up much in game, but I think the way I'd prefer to handle this is to narratively describe some sfx-appropriate way that the defender can tell where the attack came from. For example, maybe the sword doesn't suddenly become visible, but the blood on it is. Or the gun doesn't become visible, but the muzzle flash is clear. Or the Energy Blast leaves a clear trail to its originator. Essentially you narrate a way that makes more sense, while mechanically still allowing a counterattack. Does that make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Tho RAW specifically says that an attacker's fists don't become visible when attacking - which would make even less sense than a sword suddenly becoming visible. So does that mean I don't have a way to fight back against the brick or martial artist that just hit me?

 

I think the key is that the attack becomes visible in some way and that the defender (at least) has a chance to retaliate. But that doesn't have to mean the weapon itself becomes visible. I'm making this up as I go because honestly I don't remember this coming up much in game, but I think the way I'd prefer to handle this is to narratively describe some sfx-appropriate way that the defender can tell where the attack came from. For example, maybe the sword doesn't suddenly become visible, but the blood on it is. Or the gun doesn't become visible, but the muzzle flash is clear. Or the Energy Blast leaves a clear trail to its originator. Essentially you narrate a way that makes more sense, while mechanically still allowing a counterattack. Does that make sense?

The example in 6e1 is VERY clear on the issue. "Example: Hemdring the Stern, SPD 4, has a magical Ring Of Invisibility (Invisibility to Sight Group, No Fringe). When he uses his Ring, he becomes Invisible; so do his clothing, armor, and sword. On Phase 3, when Hemdring attacks a goblin with his sword, the sword appears out of thin air and cleaves the goblin in two! (Other goblins who make a PER Roll can now attack Hemdring at only -1 OCV; see 6E2 7.) At the end of Segment 3, Hemdring’s sword fades from view, since it’s once more covered by his Invisibility until he uses it to attack again."

Bolding of Emphasis is mine.

 

Examples like this is what make 5ER and 6E (I and II) So valuable. No wondering what Steve meant. He spells it out in an example.

 

To Christopher. RAW is the following re: Invisible people attacking

"Invisibility doesn’t automatically make a character’s attacks or other powers Invisible as  well (that requires the Advantage Invisible Power Effects; see 6E1 338). Using a perceivable power can expose an Invisible character’s position."

 

Also this later in the writeup re: Obvious foci and Invisible characters.

"Focus: If a character has an Obvious Focus that provides him with Invisibility, the Invisibility doesn’t cover the Focus. Only Inobvious Foci are covered by the Invisibility they generate."

 

Like I said, as a houserule I would allow an obvious focus to be invisible until it's used. Where it would become visible or some part of it would be visible. The PC on their phase could as a Zerophase action put the invisibility over the foci again. Because as RAW it would be impossible to buy an Armor Suit that gave Invisibility. I would be ok as GM to make it obvious when the power is activating (and being turned off) that the effect comes from the suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the Shield is a defensive power it's not game breaking for it to not make sound when struck.

 

It is pretty game breaking for someone who doesn't have Invisible power effects to be able to hit someone without that person seeing the attack. I have no issue with someone with a Obvious Attack Focus to keep that item invisible before it's used, but the defender MUST be able to see the attack to know where it originated from. Even Mental Powers which are invisible ex for the person being attacked work that way.

But, as noted above, you need not buy IPE on Strength. Why not? Isn't the source of the attack obvious - you were hit by something right next to you.

 

 

re Sonar. Because it's a Targeting Sense, the Invisible person must have Invisible vs a Targeting Sense (20pts per sense, vs 10 pts per non targeting sense) to remain invisible to Sonar.

THIS IS NOT RAW. 10 points of Invisibility vs Hearing functions whether the invisibility is targeting or not. See below.

 

So no you didn't cover it. It's obvious that you haven't read the rule. 6e1 pg 236 CCpg 72 and 5ER pg 192

 

6e1 p 236 in my .pdf has Healing and Images. Invisibility starts on 239 - looks like a keypad typo?

 

Yes, but SOMETIMES it IS a Targeting sense. ie Sonar, and it is possible to buy Hearing with the Targeting Adder. In 6e you would have to spend 20 points to be invisible to Targeting Hearing Senses. Though once you are invis to one Targeting sense group you can get others for 10pts each. So to know if the PC is invisible to Sonar and other Hearing Targeting senses, you would have to know how the PC bought their invisibility to sound. Whether they bought invis to a Targeting or a Non Targeting sense.

 

It has Zero to do with Rarity.

However, it is you who obviously has not read the relevant rules. I cited them back on page 2, in response to your first suggestion that some of us need to read the rules befoe we comment, but you clearly did not read that. Let me spell it out in more detail.

 

Invisibility is a Sense-Affecting Power. These powers are discussed starting on 6e1 page 159. Let me help you out here, with a lengthier cut and paste from that page:

 

Sense-Affecting Powers that affect a Sense Group typically containing Targeting Senses (e.g., the Sight Group) cost more than those which affect Sense Groups that typically contain only Nontargeting Senses (e.g., the Hearing Group).  Even if a character has bought the Targeting Sense Modifier for, say, his Hearing Sense Group, that doesn’t change the cost of Sense-Affecting Powers used against him. The GM determines which  Sense Groups typically contain Targeting Senses inhis campaign — for example, in a campaign where characters hunt aliens who detect prey by scent, the Smell/Taste Group typically contains Targeting Senses.

 

The GM must determine which Sense Groups fit this guideline. The Sight Group almost always qualifies for the higher cost, since characters most often use the Sight Group Senses to target attacks. The Hearing, Mental, and Radio Groups usually qualify for the lower cost, even though each contains one Sense which is a Targeting Sense, because those Targeting Senses are typically rare. The Smell/Taste Group and Touch Groups almost always qualify for the lower cost.

I think this makes it about as clear as it could be. Hearing is not normally targeting, so invisibility to hearing carries the lower cost. Even if someone has targeting hearing, they still cannot detect the Invisible character who paid the lower cost for invisibility to hearing. It is all about rarity, contrary to your statement above.

 

If I have a criticism about the size of the Hero rules, it's that it is often tough to find all the info related to a specific ability. Invisibility can't be read without the section on Sense-Affecting Powers, which needs the overview of Powers for context, etc. Sometimes, the rule you know exists is really tough to locate!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The example in 6e1 is VERY clear on the issue. "Example: Hemdring the Stern, SPD 4, has a magical Ring Of Invisibility (Invisibility to Sight Group, No Fringe). When he uses his Ring, he becomes Invisible; so do his clothing, armor, and sword. On Phase 3, when Hemdring attacks a goblin with his sword, the sword appears out of thin air and cleaves the goblin in two! (Other goblins who make a PER Roll can now attack Hemdring at only -1 OCV; see 6E2 7.) At the end of Segment 3, Hemdring’s sword fades from view, since it’s once more covered by his Invisibility until he uses it to attack again."

Um, I don't think anyone disagrees on what RAW says here; everyone has acknowledged RAW says the sword becomes visible. Heck, most of us have even explicitly said we understand why the rule is there. We're talking about whether or not we like it, and if there are other ways to meet the mechanical intent of the rule that don't violate narrative sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree its a D&Dism that never got really cleared up.  And in my campaign, if you paid the points to be invisible and you lack some modifier that makes it act differently, then you stay invisible the whole time the power is on.  It doesn't flicker on and off depending on a focus or when you attack, or whatever.  It just sucks to fight people who are invisible as you would expect it would.  Being invisible is very powerful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree its a D&Dism that never got really cleared up.  And in my campaign, if you paid the points to be invisible and you lack some modifier that makes it act differently, then you stay invisible the whole time the power is on.  It doesn't flicker on and off depending on a focus or when you attack, or whatever.  It just sucks to fight people who are invisible as you would expect it would.  Being invisible is very powerful.

the problem with that is that it makes IPE totally worthless. There absolutely zero reason for an Invisible person to have it. Which sucks if I am playing a sniper who uses IPE on my Rifle and Invis to Sight and sound guy get the same thing for 30pts plus they are invisible. Which is why I would make the non IPE power visible. This becomes even more important if we are using power point ceilings. So the Sniper has a less powerful attack in DC than the Invisible person if both are at the PP cap. Which is NOT fair at all.

 

The problem is magnified even further if the Invisible person has an OBVIOUS Focus. Suddenly attacks coming from the Focus isn't being penalized with the Limitation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There absolutely zero reason for an Invisible person to have it.

 

Well, there's less of a reason.  There's still value to it; the fire blast doesn't look flamey on your hands, but the flamethrower gush hitting your target still is visible.  But if someone buys invisibility, they're invisible.  It seems kind of obvious to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there's less of a reason.  There's still value to it; the fire blast doesn't look flamey on your hands, but the flamethrower gush hitting your target still is visible.  But if someone buys invisibility, they're invisible.  It seems kind of obvious to me.

 

It is certainly your houserule, but I also pointed out how it penalizes people who do take IPE. Also, how it allows someone with Obvious Foci to get around their limitation. Whatever works for your campaign.

 

BTW the character would still be invisible, but their attack would be visible as per RAW. which would give the target and others a better chance to see the Invisible person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is certainly your houserule, but I also pointed out how it penalizes people who do take IPE. Also, how it allows someone with Obvious Foci to get around their limitation. Whatever works for your campaign.

A handgun or taser is an OAF, but can be concealed in a pocket. I believe an OAF must be the clear and obvious source of the power in use, not that it must obviously be the source of an ability when not in use.

 

BTW the character would still be invisible, but their attack would be visible as per RAW. which would give the target and others a better chance to see the Invisible person.

Now we get to the challenging interaction. The muzzle flash or flames from the flamethrower should be visible, absent IPE for the power. But for how long does it remain visible? An HTH attack is more challenging - the sword hanging in the air is just weird, and RAW says your fists don't appear, and the GM should assess whether your claws appear. I agree that IPE should not be a freebie, but then it is pretty clear where a HTH attack originated from. Well, at least to the target attacked, but shouldn't his teammates also now be able to detect the attacker?

 

Clearly, there should be an advantage to having both Invisibility and IPE over having one or the other, just as having either should be advantageous compared to having neither.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the problem with that is that it makes IPE totally worthless. There absolutely zero reason for an Invisible person to have it. Which sucks if I am playing a sniper who uses IPE on my Rifle and Invis to Sight and sound guy get the same thing for 30pts plus they are invisible. Which is why I would make the non IPE power visible. This becomes even more important if we are using power point ceilings. So the Sniper has a less powerful attack in DC than the Invisible person if both are at the PP cap. Which is NOT fair at all.

 

The problem is magnified even further if the Invisible person has an OBVIOUS Focus. Suddenly attacks coming from the Focus isn't being penalized with the Limitation.

If I'm in Darkness, my attack is now IPE and my Foci are no longer Obvious. Does that "penalize" people who bought IPE and IAFs? How is Invisibility different, apart from being generally more expensive?

 

I get your point, but I feel like you're overstating things. Even if we rule that the gun stays invisible, it's still obvious that the target was shot, generally what sort of weapon was used (pistol vs blaster vs rocket launcher), at least generally where the attack came from, and that it came from an Invisible character. That's still a fair amount of information that would be hidden by IPE. It keys me to attempt to locate the character by other senses or other means. Or say Screw It and lay down a big ol' AOE attack in that general direction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm in Darkness, my attack is now IPE and my Foci are no longer Obvious. Does that "penalize" people who bought IPE and IAFs? How is Invisibility different, apart from being generally more expensive?

 

I get your point, but I feel like you're overstating things. Even if we rule that the gun stays invisible, it's still obvious that the target was shot, generally what sort of weapon was used (pistol vs blaster vs rocket launcher), at least generally where the attack came from, and that it came from an Invisible character. That's still a fair amount of information that would be hidden by IPE. It keys me to attempt to locate the character by other senses or other means. Or say Screw It and lay down a big ol' AOE attack in that general direction. 

 

Christopher said that in his games that an invisible character's attacks would be invisible as well.

 

In your Darkness example, The attack isn't technically invisible. It becomes perceptible once it leaves the confines of the darkness. Like with invisibility, the attack would become visible once it leaves the darkness. Also darkness is a bit different than invisiblity. In that it's a "visible" field of whatever that doesn't allow certain types of perception to happen. I guess you could buy IPE for Darkness and make yourself an AOE Invisibility/ and Blindness field.

 

By what RAW says, Swords and other Obvious Foci are visible. Which I would houserule away (though I probably would suggest that invisible suit person should probably buy the suit as an IIF and not an OIF).

 

Also, Blasts and RKAs should be Perceiveable ie you should be able to track back to who made the shot. Which IS the point of making people define what senses can see the attack.

 

Melee isn't as much of an issue because when someone is hit they have a basic idea of where the hit came from. Heck, there are even talents that give bonuses for figuring that out. IMHO it's far more important for Ranged attacks to define where they are coming from. BTW this rationale is IMHO why PCs effected by otherwise invisible Mental Powers always know who is initiating the attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christopher said that in his games that an invisible character's attacks would be invisible as well.

 

That's not exactly accurate.  I said their attacks are invisible when adjacent to or attached to the character.  Any effects at any distance becomes visible.  Someone shoots an arrow the bow is invisible, but the arrow becomes visible when it is away from the bow and the character, for example.  Its a question of the personal effect of invisibility being negated or not.  I say its not negated by attacking, whether you have a focus or not.  Your invisibility makes you invisible.  

 

Its like having inaudibility, you can still use incantations (it doesn't make you mute, just inaudible) but nobody can hear them because nobody can hear anything they do.  As a GM I'd be at best skeptical of a character that bought both -- if its a constant or regular thing, those incantations lose their limitation -- but tha'ts how it works as I see it.

 

Its just like gestures and invisibility.  Just because you have gestures doesn't make your arms suddenly show up when you use a power that requires them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...