Invisibility to Hearing Group

[Tasha]

I think that RAI for Incantations is to simulate the behavior seen in D&D where Casters in a "Silence" spell (aka Darkness vs Sound) can't cast spells with Verbal Components to them.

RAI for Gestures is to give clearly understood body language that tells someone at a glance that the Caster is about to cast a spell. It's probably a bit underpriced given that restrainable is worth a -1/2 Limitation and Gestures is Restrainable + Caster Telegraphs when they are going to use this ability. So gestures work in a Darkness field because SOMEONE who has perception that can see though the Darkness can see the gestures and know that an ability is about to be used.

 

Also keep in mind that Gestures and Incantations are built for non Superheroic Games (The books even say so).

[Lucius]

While either read can be supported with the words as written, the interpretation which leads to the most absurd results is typically the wrong one.

Can I quote you on that?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says I just did

[bigdamnhero]

Steve is not forcing anything on you. If you don't think your motions meet that criteria, don't take the limitation. If you think what you are doing warrants a limitation, there is always limited power, which will do whatever you decide it will do in your game. But the official rules are there so that people will have a standard set of things that are agreed upon for that limitation. What Steve has done is give us a standard value for the limitation described in the book. You are welcome to say you wiggle your fingers behind your back or in a way that does not draw attention, but that is probably not worth a -1/4.

Exactly. The question is never "what kind of gestures are permissible/required" but "What kind of gestures qualify for a Gestures Limitation." Pointing a gun at someone - or pointing my finger at someone - is technically a gesture, but it's not a Gesture in game terms. Minor wand flicks are no different IMO.

 

And of course, that's just what RAW says, which you are free (indeed, encouraged) to adapt/modify/ignore if you feel another ruling fits your game better.

[Hugh Neilson]

Can I quote you on that?

The Courts do. That's where I paraphrased/lifted the concept from anyway.

[Christopher R Taylor]

I think that RAI for Incantations is to simulate the behavior seen in D&D 

 

I'm certain that's where they came from.

 

where Casters in a "Silence" spell (aka Darkness vs Sound) can't cast spells with Verbal Components to them.

 

Here's where we run into a problem.  Because in D&D they have a silence spell that causes people to be silenced, not inaudible.  I know that sounds the same but its not; darkness is merely an area where a sense doesn't work (hearing in this case), not an area where you cannot speak.  Darkness vs sound can be a sonic emitter that makes it impossible to hear anything else -- darkness is very aggressive in that its clearly perceptible and obvious what's causing the blackout.

 

So should darkness stop incantations?  It always has in Hero, because it seems like the proper build, but is it?  Or would another build make more sense?  I struggled with this building my Codex, because the concept of a loud area silencing casters just didn't make sense to me.  But there isn't really an easy or obvious alternative.  In 5th edition, where there was both Suppress and Steve's notes on buying senses and basic abilities for points, you could actually build, literally, a silence effect: Suppress speech.  That's not exactly kosher in the new rules.

[Hugh Neilson]

Pointing a gun at someone - or pointing my finger at someone - is technically a gesture, but it's not a Gesture in game terms. Minor wand flicks are no different IMO.

All powers have a point of origin - pointing your finger could be that by itself. The gun and the wand are foci, so a limitation is already there.

[Tasha]

I'm certain that's where they came from.

 

Here's where we run into a problem.  Because in D&D they have a silence spell that causes people to be silenced, not inaudible.  I know that sounds the same but its not; darkness is merely an area where a sense doesn't work (hearing in this case), not an area where you cannot speak.  Darkness vs sound can be a sonic emitter that makes it impossible to hear anything else -- darkness is very aggressive in that its clearly perceptible and obvious what's causing the blackout.

 

So should darkness stop incantations?  It always has in Hero, because it seems like the proper build, but is it?  Or would another build make more sense?  I struggled with this building my Codex, because the concept of a loud area silencing casters just didn't make sense to me.  But there isn't really an easy or obvious alternative.  In 5th edition, where there was both Suppress and Steve's notes on buying senses and basic abilities for points, you could actually build, literally, a silence effect: Suppress speech.  That's not exactly kosher in the new rules.

Incantations specifically can't be used in a Sound Darkness field (6e1 pg 381) "To use Incantations, a character must be able to speak freely and clearly — if he’s gagged or has his mouth full, he can’t activate and/or use the power. It’s also impossible to use the power while in a silence field (see Darkness)."

 

This is very explicit and supports my RAI argument.

 

The Potterverse wands and the gestures used are able to be seen from pretty far away which IMHO fulfills the Gestures requirement. I don't believe that a PC must windmill their arms to fulfill the gestures requirements. Just a waving of the hands that can be seen from a decent distance away. Darkness vs sight doesn't prevent gestures or it would be called out specifically in the text like Incantations. Also, keep in mind that this is a +1/4 limitation so as long as the gestures aren't easy to hide or too subtle to see from 5-8m away then I would be willing to let them slide. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yes, Tasha.  I know.  That's how its done in Hero.  Which is why I asked should it?  Because strictly speaking it ought not stop incantations to merely be cloaked in a field of inaudibility.  It should only work to actually silence the character in some manner, not make them impossible to hear.

 

See, the problem we often run into on these boards is when someone speculates if things could be done differently or better, and someone else inevitably quotes the rulebook like a scripture reading as if that solves the issue.

[Steve]

Yes, Tasha. I know. That's how its done in Hero. Which is why I asked should it? Because strictly speaking it ought not stop incantations to merely be cloaked in a field of inaudibility. It should only work to actually silence the character in some manner, not make them impossible to hear.

 

See, the problem we often run into on these boards is when someone speculates if things could be done differently or better, and someone else inevitably quotes the rulebook like a scripture reading as if that solves the issue.

Yes, things could be done differently. You could make Darkness versus Sight work to stop Gestures, just like you could make Darkness versus Hearing not affect Incantations. The RAW has it set to work one way, but anyone can do it however they want as a house rule.

 

Should it be different? If you feel it should, then do it. Playtest it and see how it goes. Not everyone here is going to agree with proposed changes to how things are done, but complaining about people preferring to refer to the RAW for answers seems like a straw man.

 

The rules are what they are.

[Tasha]

Yes, Tasha.  I know.  That's how its done in Hero.  Which is why I asked should it?  Because strictly speaking it ought not stop incantations to merely be cloaked in a field of inaudibility.  It should only work to actually silence the character in some manner, not make them impossible to hear.

 

See, the problem we often run into on these boards is when someone speculates if things could be done differently or better, and someone else inevitably quotes the rulebook like a scripture reading as if that solves the issue.

Because it NOT clear at all that you were talking about houserules. You will notice when I switch to my Opinion I DO say In My Opinion (or IMHO) or in my game etc. If you don't make it clear that you are talking about a houserule or a proposed change to the rules, then don't be surprised when people point out RAW and what they think is RAI.

 

Also, when you do have a rule change proposal, expect that some people will disagree with you.

[Rhino]

The reason I started this thread is because I have a player who bought invisibility to sight group, hearing group and mind scan with no fringe.  He uses a powerful multipower sniper rifle.  One of the slots is a blast with complete IPE and no knockback.  Another is an indirect attack that allows him to shoot through obstacles (he has the ability to see through them.) The combination is tough to challenge as a GM without it appearing that I am unfairly gunning for him.  RAW allows a non-targeting perception check as a half phase action to sense what hex he is in and reduce the penalties to DCV and OCV that normally apply (6E2 125).  We are having fun, and I don't want to unilaterally nerf his character design.  Any suggestions?

[bigdamnhero]

Werewolves or other creatures that have Smell as a Tracking/Targeting Sense? Large AOE Attacks? Or else make the "challenges" more about protecting innocents/DNPCs/whatever rather than attacking him directly. Honestly, I probably wouldn't have approved the character because I have no more idea how to challenge him than you do. So I'm not sure how to advise you.

[Steve]

A character with tracking and targeting on their smell sense would be able to find this character. Characters with animal powers would be a good mix to add to any opposing group. Give him a catgirl nemesis.

 

If he suddenly buys up his invisibility to then cover smell, that would be a spot defense issue to me as GM.

 

An AoE to dispel his invisibility would make sense for any tech types or opposing spellcasters.

 

You could have a nasty villain sort with Indirect on his attacks dress up some normal and make it look like attacks are coming from them.

[Midnightninja]

If he suddenly buys up his invisibility to then cover smell, that would be a spot defense issue to me as GM.

 

 

Spot defense?

[Rhino]

Werewolves or other creatures that have Smell as a Tracking/Targeting Sense? Large AOE Attacks? Or else make the "challenges" more about protecting innocents/DNPCs/whatever rather than attacking him directly. Honestly, I probably wouldn't have approved the character because I have no more idea how to challenge him than you do. So I'm not sure how to advise you.

Yeah, we are in the middle of a fight against Red Winter (I am using Champions Universe) and White Wolf used tracking smell to locate his general area and Red Dawn lit him up with an AOE blast.  The Soviet Guard is using tactics and perception to figure out where he is based upon who he attacks and how. 

[Steve]

Spot defense?

 

Spot defense is when a character gets hit with an attack they can't defend from and immediately start buying up a defense to counter it. After their first Flash attack, they start buying Flash Defense. Hit with their first Drain, they then start buying up Power Defense. And so on.

[eepjr24]

 

The way you want to read this rule, you're saying gestures stop working when nobody is looking or they're behind something.  That's just plainly not how the limitation is meant to work.

 

visible <> viewed. 

 

vis·i·ble

ˈvizəb(ə)l/

adjective

 

1. 1.

   able to be seen.

 

So no, I don't think if no one is viewing that it is not visible. If you are in a darkness (vs sight) field or invisible (vs sight), it will not work. If you don't want it to work that way, take a different limitation. Or feel free to ask about the specifics in the rules forum.

 

- E

[Tasha]

visible <> viewed. 

 

vis·i·ble   vizəb(ə)l/

 

adjective

1.  able to be seen.

 

So no, I don't think if no one is viewing that it is not visible. If you are in a darkness (vs sight) field or invisible (vs sight), it will not work. If you don't want it to work that way, take a different limitation. Or feel free to ask about the specifics in the rules forum.

 

- E

 

I don't believe that the gestures must be seen for them to work. They would work if the PC was behind a wall  or other obstacle. Also unlike Incantations which DO say that a Sound Silence spell would set off the limitation, Gestures doesn't mention anything about being seen.

 

A character can use a power with this Limitation only if he makes gestures that are obviously out of the ordinary. He must be able to move freely — if he’s encumbered or in a confined space, the power should function poorly, if at all. If he’s restrained or Grabbed, he cannot activate and/or use the power. 

 

Gestures must be clearly visible at a distance and cannot be useful for any purpose other than activating that specific power (Gestures cannot include attacking with a weapon, for example). If the character takes damage from or is adversely affected by any power that requires an Attack Roll or MCV Attack Roll while he’s Gesturing, the power doesn’t activate or immediately turns off

 

It only mentions being restrained or damaged as being what stops incantations.

 

I just asked Steve if being invisible or in Darkness prevented powers using gestures from working.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Because it NOT clear at all that you were talking about houserules.

 

That's because I'm not.  Houserules are what people do with their campaigns to adjust rules to fit their ideas.

 

What I'm talking about is whether the rules as written make sense and ought to be that way.  Should darkness vs sound negate incantations?  Or should that make no difference?  Should another ability stop them instead?  Not "here's how I do it" but "should the rules be the way they are written, and could it be done better?"

 

I don't believe that the gestures must be seen for them to work. 

 

See Hugh's comment about absurdity and probably being wrong.

 

I see gestures and incantation as parallel limitations: each requiring excessive sensory activity to make a power function.  Both should function in parallel manners.

[massey]

The reason I started this thread is because I have a player who bought invisibility to sight group, hearing group and mind scan with no fringe.  He uses a powerful multipower sniper rifle.  One of the slots is a blast with complete IPE and no knockback.  Another is an indirect attack that allows him to shoot through obstacles (he has the ability to see through them.) The combination is tough to challenge as a GM without it appearing that I am unfairly gunning for him.  RAW allows a non-targeting perception check as a half phase action to sense what hex he is in and reduce the penalties to DCV and OCV that normally apply (6E2 125).  We are having fun, and I don't want to unilaterally nerf his character design.  Any suggestions?

 

Mobile enemies.  Keep the fight moving.  How does your player always get perfectly into position?  Generally, heroes react to villains doing things.  The villains are robbing a bank, the heroes hear about it and show up to stop them.  The villains are holding people hostage, the heroes hear about it and show up to stop them.  That type of situation doesn't have to be conducive to a character setting up in good sniping position.

 

What about having a running battle?  The heroes show up and the villains are already on the move.  The heroes have to chase them.  Captain Sniper doesn't have a chance to climb a building and set up a good shot.  Go ahead and let him do it every once in a while, it makes him feel like he didn't waste points.  But the rest of the time, have people knock each other through walls.  Have fights in creative places, like underground steam tunnels.  Or maybe one of those aquariums with a glass tunnel through the water.  Places where the guy just can't sit back and shoot.

[massey]

Part of the problem with asking Steve about every potential rules interaction is that all he can really do is give an answer that seems right at the time.  That doesn't mean it's the best answer.  A lot of times these answers seem special effect dependent, as well.  That's how we got the magically appearing sword, honestly.

 

It's not his fault, it's just the nature of the beast.  You go to him with a power description, ask 'how do these things interact?' and he comes up with the best answer he can at that time.

 

I've always assumed that Darkness vs Hearing would stop a power with Incantations.  It seems like the natural counter to it.  I mean it's really the D&D Silence spell in action.  But that is assuming a D&D special effect for a Hero System power.  It's what we probably think of, by default.  But what if the Darkness is defined as a deafening roar, like a jet engine?  Then you can still talk, but nobody can hear you.  Would it stop Incantations then?  Should it?  What if your Darkness power shunts all sound into a neighboring dimension, or 50 miles to the west?  You can still talk, but the sound goes somewhere else.  Should that stop Incantations?

 

The more you include these case-specific examples in the core rulebook, as happened apparently with 6th edition, the more you build in a sfx-specific bias into the game.

[eepjr24]

The reason I started this thread is because I have a player who bought invisibility to sight group, hearing group and mind scan with no fringe.  He uses a powerful multipower sniper rifle.  One of the slots is a blast with complete IPE and no knockback.  Another is an indirect attack that allows him to shoot through obstacles (he has the ability to see through them.) The combination is tough to challenge as a GM without it appearing that I am unfairly gunning for him.  RAW allows a non-targeting perception check as a half phase action to sense what hex he is in and reduce the penalties to DCV and OCV that normally apply (6E2 125).  We are having fun, and I don't want to unilaterally nerf his character design.  Any suggestions?

Options are endless.

 

1. If he has an accessible focus, it needs to get taken away sometimes. He saved those points because it is a limitation. =)

2. Make the villains more villainous.  Have them mix in crowds and use them for shields. Much harder to shoot into a crowd than to go grab the villain. 

3. Give him a mirror. Invisible sniper rifle hero meet chameleon bow sniper villain.

4. Have the villain team brick go after him. With those advantages on his attacks he should not be close to max DC's for the campaign, which means he is probably not hurting the brick much (Full IPE is a +1).

5. Create effects that don't block sight but do impede targeting. Change Environment with +6 Range Modifier and an AOE. SFX can be fog, dust, optical illusions, refracting light, or whatever else you come up with.

6. Images. Keep shooting them, they keep staying up. Oooops, did you just blow up a lot of property? The mayor wants to have a talk with you.

7. Speedsters tend to give snipers a lot of trouble. High DCV and the ability to quickly block out and search an area for hidden foes with things like a can of spray paint....

 

The list goes on.

 

- E

[Hugh Neilson]

What would the PCs do faced with a similar challenge? I find that typically helps

 

Is he known to operate in this manner? If so, the opponents should be looking for his concealed vantage point, shouldn't they?

 

Perhaps a group of opponents tires of this. How might they deal with it?

 

How about staging a diversionary "combat" while their hired guns seek him out specifically. For example:

 

First, a Mentalist mind scans the area to establish his location;

 

Next, he provides that location to a Teleporter with Extra Mass, whereupon Mentalist, Teleporter and a couple more villains pop in around the sniper. Now it's 4 against 1 - how long will it take his teammates to get to him? Can he even make them aware there is a problem?

 

Being far away from the team has its down sides - just as the opponents they are facing can't easily target the sniper, the team cannot easily help him.

 

Unfortunately, that power suite seems to leave him either removed from the battle and unbeatable, or he is located far from the rest of the team and crushed into the dirt.

 

Lots of other good ideas presented by others.

 

What blocks his senses? When you want to hide from Superman, you use a lot of lead walls, right?

[Christopher R Taylor]

The combination is tough to challenge as a GM without it appearing that I am unfairly gunning for him.

 

With all those advantages he's probably not doing gigantic damage.  He's likely more a nuisance than a killer, so having him around nibbling away at targets is likely acceptable in your game.  If its not, take a look at the active points you're allowing vs the defenses on the enemies.  Also, if there's an invisible sniper, Area Effect helps find them, so the bad guys should try that.

[bigdamnhero]

...or he's doing good damage but he scrimped on defenses, trusting his Invisibility to protect him. Hello wide-scale AOE attacks..,