Duplication

[Amorkca]

Marvel Comics did this in an X-men spinoff - I think it was Alpha Flight.  Where a villain called Flashback could bring duplicates of himself from the future.

 

One of them died and he fell apart cause he didn't know how far in the future his self died, he just knew he was going to die sometime soon...

 

Interesting concept for sure!!!

 

I loved your write up Duke Bushido, it was scary and exciting!!

[Duke Bushido]

Marvel Comics did this in an X-men spinoff - I think it was Alpha Flight.  Where a villain called Flashback could bring duplicates of himself from the future.

 

One of them died and he fell apart cause he didn't know how far in the future his self died, he just knew he was going to die sometime soon...

 

Interesting concept for sure!!!

Very, _very_ cool.

 

Though it just proves it: even great ideas happen more than once. Still, the whole idea makes for an interesting thought experience, even if it never gets explored through play. (and I guess my general lack of exposure to comic books is showing again, isn't it? )

 

 

I loved your write up Duke Bushido, it was scary and exciting!!

 

Well thank you, Amorcka. Very kind of you. But "Duke" is fine. I didn't have the good sense that many other members have to make a username using a character's name or some other sort of thing. "Duke" actually is my name. The "Bushido" is an inside nod to a very old, very dear friend.

[Doc Democracy]

The concept behind The Madding Crowd is that she is drawing alternate selves from alternate timelines/universes. Now as there is an infinite number of alternates she will never run out of them but she knows that each time one of these alternates die, it is her from an alternate universe that has died. The horror is that she has no idea whether she is the original or whether that person died years before.

 

The player and I also came up with the idea that the dress and demeanour of those alternates called might provide clues to things about to occur in this timeline that may have already happened in other timelines, kind of legitimate presaging that I as GM wants to do but a reason for purchasing limited prescience sometime in the future.

 

Doc

[Duke Bushido]

Foreshadowing through Duplication-- neat!

 

Checked out the link you put up to the character sheet. Duplication as SFX is something that is, quite frankly, not considered often enough. I'm not saying that it's "better" than making actual copies, but in my own experience, the way many players actually user their very expensive Duplication power would be better represented (and more cost-effective) done just that way: without actually buying Duplication.

 

 

That's an extremely cool photo you (or the player?) found for the character sheet. What's that from?

 

 

Duke

 

----------------------

 

EDIT:

 

And what game is the version with the photo from?

[Christopher]

In 5ER in the left margin's power example of Duplication on page 152, there is this within the build for Astral Form:

​Both Characters Die If They Do Not Recombine Within 24 Hours (-1/2)

 

​As for fear of death/maiming, when a Duplicate dies, the character points spent on it are lost forever and the character loses a part of him/herself -- so that fear should already exist. (Example: If a character has the ability to create exactly one duplicate and that duplicate dies, the character can create no duplicates -- but still has the power and simply can't do anything with it until the player spends some points to double the number of duplicates from 1 to 2 (assuming the GM permits it -- which most would after allowing for cinematic effect)  ... in which case instead of being able to create 2 duplicates s/he'll still be limited to only 1 -- since the other one died.)

Resurrection Regeneration and Healing on the Duplicate explicitly work as well.

 

Sure; there's a fear. But it's a Player fear more than a Character fear:

 

Oh noes! I will have spent some points for which I no longer get good value!

 

Sure; there's a character side:

 

I feel like there's a part of me that I've lost forever. I hope that perhaps, someday, I may be able to repair that part of me that's missing-- etc, etc, etc, on and on and on.

 

But as written, the lost guy is _duplicate_. A copy. Perhaps even closer than an identical twin; perhaps even closer than a siamese twin. But a different person.

If it was truly a copy, why can he not just create another one in it's place?

By rules definition Duplication has a finite pool of alternates to draw from. There is nothing disposeable, neither for the player nor Character.

 

You are implying special effect from Power build.

Triplicate Girl would be build with Duplication, most likely. Yet she still was hurt (emotionally) by loosing one of them.

 

Even if you asume a very callous user that regards all his duplicates as "expendable" (and they somehow go along with that), he would still run out of them eventually. Asuming a duplicate, not a summon build of course.

 

Marvel Comics did this in an X-men spinoff - I think it was Alpha Flight.  Where a villain called Flashback could bring duplicates of himself from the future.

 

One of them died and he fell apart cause he didn't know how far in the future his self died, he just knew he was going to die sometime soon...

 

Interesting concept for sure!!!

 

I loved your write up Duke Bushido, it was scary and exciting!!

Some would fear it. Some would jsut own it:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0571.html

Really depends how common reviving is in that universe.

[Duke Bushido]

If it was truly a copy, why can he not just create another one in it's place?

Meta reasons: game balance, etc. "Because the rules say so."

 

You are implying special effect from Power build.

Not at all. I don't know what I said that suggests that. Specifically, I am referring _directly_ to a special effect, and _only_ the special effect. This special effect could be applied to any sort of build, even one that only simulates actual Duplication, such as the one Doc D posted. (Granted, it's a bit harder to kill yourself with a simulated Duplication, but the role playing potential is still there).

 

Triplicate Girl would be build with Duplication, most likely. Yet she still was hurt (emotionally) by loosing one of them.

 

Even if you asume a very callous user that regards all his duplicates as "expendable" (and they somehow go along with that), he would still run out of them eventually. Asuming a duplicate, not a summon build of course.

I don't deny the possibility for a painful loss; I specifically touched on the idea that the "core" character may be extremely close to or even find the duplicate to be a an essential part of themselves.

 

I postulate, however, that using a "you" from some random point in the future and losing _that_ has an element of horror that more traditional Duplication ideas simply can't match.

 

 

Some would fear it. Some would jsut own it:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0571.html

Really depends how common reviving is in that universe.

I'm on the way out the door for work; I'll have to check that out later. Thanks for the link!

 

 

Duke

[Hugh Neilson]

I find "dead duplicates are gone forever" very much an orphan rule. CP are typically never lost or destroyed (Steve even ditched the Independent limitation on foci in 6e). Your focus gets destroyed? You get another one eventually. You can Summon an infinite number of creatures (and you can build Duplication as Summoning pretty easily), so why does Duplication need a "dead is dead" rule?

[Duke Bushido]

I have to agree.

 

Personally, we've always allowed Dupes to show back up after a couple of sessions, but I figured that was just us.

 

And Foci can be rebuilt between sessions or magically re-appear; whichever is SDX* appropriate.

 

 

 

 

 

--------------------

 

 

* SFX

 

My bad.

Edited September 27, 2016 by Duke Bushido

[Surrealone]

So why does Duplication need a "dead is dead" rule?

No one said it was needed .. but it's RAW per both 5er and 6e.

 

Frankly, I don't see a problem with it.  If you're playing one character and it can die, what's the issue with multiple characters you're playing being able to die?  For that matter, what's the issue with death, at all?  I ask this because, without death/risk, there's very little point in playing because you are doing so knowing that everything will always work out ... eventually ... and that's stupidly boring (to my way of thinking, anyway).  The world just doesn't work that way -- and neither do most storylines.  Crap happens.  Characters die and are gone forever.  Why not duplicates, too?

 

Philosophical Aside:

In keeping with your concern around permanent loss of CP that have been spent, do you also think that Favors (i.e. the Favor perk) should magically reappear once used, too?  I'd expect you would if you're to be consistent in your application of your remark that "CP are typically never lost or destroyed", but Favors are single use and permanently lost once used.  It's not different, really -- as it's CP that's permanently lost ... so if you think CP shouldn't be lost or destroyed and you apply that philosophy evenly, then you must also think that Favors should be reusable, yes?

[Christopher R Taylor]

I find its best to stay at 4 or fewer copies or the effect Doc Democracy notes really gets to be a problem: its the empire of Duplicate man, and everyone else is just a spectator.

 

So why does Duplication need a "dead is dead" rule?

 

 

Yeah that's one I've house ruled out every time, both that and Deep Cover.  I think its a nod to Triplicate Lass who lost a copy permanently in the comics.

 

If you lose your points permanently, that's worth a limitation.

[Duke Bushido]

Frankly, I don't see a problem with it.

Personally, I _don't_ have a problem with it. However, over the years, I've found that players _do_ seem to have a very large problem with it. But then again, I enjoy the role-playing / story-telling side of RPGs far more than the dice-and-did-we-kill-it? side of the games.

 

If you're playing one character and it can die, what's the issue with multiple characters you're playing being able to die?

Again, I don't have a real issue with it. However, as Hugh pointed out above, you can use Summon to draw from somewhere else in the infinite multiverse an exact copy of you. And if it dies, you can summon another one. And so on and so forth.

 

That's from a meta point of view, of course. From an in-game point of view-- primarily a player point of view-- it's not really a death so much as the permanent loss of what is quite likely the bulk of your arsenal. It's akin to telling the player something like "you can continue, but you can no longer use your Force Field, your Energy Blast, or the first three of your Enhanced Senses." Or, looked at another way: Fine. You were a 400-pt character, but now you're a 250 pt character. But you're still free to play with the other 400-pt characters and work to overcome the 450-pt villains.

 

 

That's just perspective. I recall from my last time on the board a decade or so ago that there are people who think I'm unusually cruel for not allowing Players to re-allocate points on existing and played characters:

 

"You know; I think it would be more effective for me to drop the Targeting on my sense of Smell and get another couple of pluses on my Telescopic Vision. Also, I wasn't dropping the villains as quickly as I want, so I'm going to drop a couple of dice from my Energy Blast and swap it out for an Armor Piercing Ranged Killing Attack."

 

No. No, you're not.

 

That's me. I allow it once or twice, early on for new players-- _maybe_. If I feel that they are at least as efficient as the other players, then I'm less likely to allow it.

 

Honestly, this is the line taken by most all the GMs I know. When I questioned someone on this board about why they allowed it even for very experienced players, I was lucky not to get the feathers with the hot tar.

 

Similarly, there are those groups that, should the middle of the campaign result in someone gaining a new Hunted, will immediately award points to the player to spend--the value of the Hunted. I don't. In-game things like that are part of the story. It's not like managing to irritate the crap out of the IRS results in a sudden windfall for the guy who did it, any more than reminding a police officer that you don't legally need a driver's license to "travel by car" so long as you're not doing it for money results in something wonderful and grand for you.

 

But I digress. Suffice it to say that there are those out there who demand some sort of spendable value for every single thing that happens to their sheet, even if they did it themselves.

 

 

For that matter, what's the issue with death, at all?

I can see how one could push that relationship, given that in-game, the duplicate "dies," but it's a different conversation. Discussing the game effects, losing a Duplicate is simply losing a Power. It's akin to "Suppress: Duplication" for a period of however long the core character is going to live plus a couple of days.

 

Losing a power _isn't_ death. It's maiming. All brave young warriors walk boldly toward danger, knowing that they face death head-on. They spit in his eye and keep on marching. They don't mind dying for the good cause: it's noble. Tell a patriotic soldier that he's risking his life, and there's almost a romance associated with the idea.

 

Tell him he's risking spending the rest of his life with no arms and hiring people to wipe his rear, and things are different.

 

That's probably the best relation I could offer: players are reacting to the perceived maiming of their character, and not the death of a single duplicate.

 

 

Philosophical Aside:

In keeping with your concern around permanent loss of CP that have been spent, do you also think that Favors (i.e. the Favor perk) should magically reappear once used, too?

Are you asking a specific person this specific question, or just inviting conversation on it? If you're inviting conversation, I can offer that I personally do not allow the Favor to reappear (see my views on "gone forever" points, up above. i have had players wheedle that they should be allowed to turn it into a new favor or be rebated the points, but generally "gone is gone." I seem to recall a couple of instances of allowing (with additional EP) a Favor to be turned into a Contact, but that was primarily do to the role playing of the characters involved and the situation involved. But that's me: I make it a point to reward good role playing.

 

But as far as "gone is gone," do you remember the old Champions power offerings in Dragon Magazine, way, _way_ back when? There was one offered there, too: Extra Life. The build took it down to 3 pts actual cost, but "gone was gone." To this day, we use something similar (originally used it as-written, but after 4e, felt a build based on "Transformation" seemed to "feel" more correct, since you didn't just suddenly get back up and rejoin the fray). At any rate, it costs -- for us-- ten points, but still: "Gone is gone."  The miraculously-revived you doesn't have an Extra life until you pay for it. Those ten points are gone.

 

Now that's probably a bad example, since the players know it up-front, they can decide if it's worth it to them; it's not quite the same as having your entire concept permanently knee-capped mid-campaign.

 

 

 

I find its best to stay at 4 or fewer copies or the effect Doc Democracy notes really gets to be a problem: its the empire of Duplicate man, and everyone else is just a spectator.

Well-said, the both of you.

 

 

 

 

If you lose your points permanently, that's worth a limitation.

 

Could you elaborate on this, please? I'm not sure if you mean a Power Limitation (i.e., "cost reduction,") or a Character Disadvantage.

 

If you're referring to a cost discount, then I disagree (but in a friendly, affable manor ) simply because the Players (if you're using that rule) should know up-front, when they consider purchasing Duplication, that there is a possibility those points will be lost. Given that it's in the rules and the Power write-up for all editions where it's cannon, it seems just as likely that it can be assumed the pricing listed has already taken into mind that the points _could_ be lost through the death of a duplicate. There's no reason _not_ to assume that, particularly since 5e and (I'm told) 6e both canonized the assumption the HtH Attack can only be used in conjunction with your STR (a different conversation; I know). This seems like a good example of the idea that the pricing as-is already makes certain assumptions about the Power. I don't think it _should_, given that the idea is bare-bones effect fine-tuned entirely through Advantages and Limitations, but it does demonstrate that the guys making the rules aren't always going to agree with everyone playing the game. (On the plus side, at least the folks at HERO are not going to Gygax us about House Rules. )

 

 

--------

 

EDIT:

 

Oh! Christopher:

 

Thanks for the link to the comic. I've checked out a few others, and they're hilarious! Guess I'll be up late tonight....

[Surrealone]

...as Hugh pointed out above, you can use Summon to draw from somewhere else in the infinite multiverse an exact copy of you. And if it dies, you can summon another one.

...

Discussing the game effects, losing a Duplicate is simply losing a Power. It's akin to "Suppress: Duplication" for a period of however long the core character is going to live plus a couple of days.

 

 

 

Are you asking a specific person this specific question, or just inviting conversation on it?

 

Actually, losing a duplicate is NOT losing a power, since the power remains and is simply less effective UNTIL you spend some experience (5cp, to be exact) on doubling the number of duplicates you can produce (from say 1 [which is dead] ... to 2 [one of which is dead -- leaving you with 1 as you originally had).

 

I was, by the way, directing my Favor question at Hugh -- specifically to test his consistency regarding his opinion that "CP are typically never lost or destroyed".  If he's consistent about it then it begs the question of how he'd handle Favors given their cost structure ... whereas if he's inconsistent about it, then it begs the question as to the logic behind it being ok for some CP to be lost/destroyed but not others.

 

And I do remember the Extra Life option!  Wow, talk about a ride in the WABAC machine!

[Duke Bushido]

Actually, losing a duplicate is NOT losing a power, since the power remains and is simply less effective UNTIL you spend some experience (5cp, to be exact)

True, of course. I was positing a "worst case" such as you only had the power to make one duplicate, or _all_ of your duplicates had been killed. And yes; by the current rules it takes 5 pts to double your duplicates, so actually the _more_ duplicates you can already make, the less you notice the loss of one:

 

If you can make 32 duplicates and ten of them are killed, you can only make 22 duplicates (or you make 22 live duplicates and ten dead ones, lying there on the battlefield, everyone awkwardly trying to not notice them?). But as soon as you buy another doubling-- 5 pts, by current rules (I assume, based on your last reply) you can make thirty two more, for a new total of 54 living ones (and possibly ten dead ones).

 

 

In this case, Duplicates are remarkably inexpensive. (Note: Unless everyone at the table is playing two or three of your duplicates, I'm not letting to have 64 dupes except as a special effect for something else). If you only make one, though, and that one gets killed, your next five points only allows you to make one more. Granted, this is economics more than a limiting issue, but it's interesting on the "value for your points" aspect.

 

But not everyone is playing by the latest rules. If I may use myself and my group (please, forgive the bad form of this; I don't know anyone else still playing by primarily 2e rules), then Duplication is insanely crippling if you lose a Duplicate:

 

The cost of a single duplicate is 1/3 your total points minus the cost of Duplication. Thus, a character built on 180 pts before Duplication must pay 60 points for a Duplicate. There are no adders for additional copies: if you want a second duplicate, you pay another 60 pts.

 

Under these rules (the original Duplication rules: Champions III, p.27-28), there appears to be the same "gone is gone" rule. It's not expressly stated, but a couple of references to how to handle powers "only when combined" after the loss of a Duplicate certainly make it clear that gone is gone, and you can't get another Dupe until you pay the cost of that Dupe (in this case, 60 pts).

 

Earning 5 EPs isn't like D&D: kill five things, take their wallets, and gain a level. It's slow going. Earning 60 is twelve times as slow. It's for this reason that I generally allow dupes to "return" at a rate of roughly 1 dupe for every two or three game sessions. I'm not crazy about it-- I think they should be gone, as not only makes sense, but is in keeping with the rules. The players aren't happy about it because they want their dupes back as soon as the combat that killed them has ended. This equality of unhappiness is how I know I've struck a reasonable compromise: despite what they try to teach you in ethics school, comprise means that everyone is equally miserable.

 

 

 

 

 

I was, by the way, directing my Favor question at Hugh

I see. Thank you for the clarification, and please accept my hasty withdrawal of all opinions, thoughts, and conversational strings put forth by me.

 

 

And I do remember the Extra Life option!  Wow, talk about a ride in the WABAC machine!

Ain't it grand?

 

Everyone remembers that article with great fondness.....

 

Right up until they remember "Bouncing."

 

Then they start jamming pipe cleaners up their noses, over and over again, trying to make the memories go away....

 

 

 

Duke

[Duke Bushido]

(But looking at it now, 3 pts isn't a bad investment to get that Duplicate back, is it? )

[Surrealone]

No need to withdraw opinions on the Favors bit; all opinions are welcome -- but it's Hugh's response I'm specifically waiting on for that one.

 

And hey, I liked bouncing!

[Duke Bushido]

No need to withdraw opinions on the Favors bit; all opinions are welcome -- but it's Hugh's response I'm specifically waiting on for that one.

Thank you for your graciousness. Seriously: I thoroughly enjoy _genuine_ conversations (as opposed to the arguments found on most other forums) simply because, even if no opinions are _changed_, a great deal of information and alternative viewpoints come to light. I was in a conversation a few days ago in which Hugh was a major contributor, and while we disagreed on as many points as we agreed on, the entire conversation was _wonderful_. (can you tell I spend my days with childlike adults and my nights with actual children? )

 

 

And hey, I liked bouncing!

HA!

 

You and my very first Champions GM. I have no idea why. I mean, I know there have been one or two characters here and there that probably bounced, but honestly, it just seemed too easy to build with Flight or Superleap to actually need its own write-up. Kind of like how Swinging seems to have gone away in later editions.

[Duke Bushido]

childlike adults

 

Sorry! Sorry; sorry. I meant "customers."

 

Stupid autocorrect....

[Christopher]

I find "dead duplicates are gone forever" very much an orphan rule. CP are typically never lost or destroyed (Steve even ditched the Independent limitation on foci in 6e). Your focus gets destroyed? You get another one eventually. You can Summon an infinite number of creatures (and you can build Duplication as Summoning pretty easily), so why does Duplication need a "dead is dead" rule?

 

 

 

I find its best to stay at 4 or fewer copies or the effect Doc Democracy notes really gets to be a problem: its the empire of Duplicate man, and everyone else is just a spectator.

 

 

Yeah that's one I've house ruled out every time, both that and Deep Cover.  I think its a nod to Triplicate Lass who lost a copy permanently in the comics.

 

If you lose your points permanently, that's worth a limitation.

 

"Duplicates stay death unless revivedd by build-in Regeneration or another Power" is a important balance factor.

As important as "Must win a EGO contest" is on Summon and "Base form can not act while Multiform is engaged".

 

I wrote about it in detail almost 4 years ago, but I still think it holds:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/85482-power-guide/

"Summon, Duplication, Multiform and Follower are a "quartet" of powers/perks that allow you acess to additional characters sheets. However the limits are widly different.

Summon gives you the least controll, but also the most disposable and variable assitance that can act on it's own.

Duplication is a lot more problematic - if a duplciate dies it stays dead and making them different is expensive, but it also offers the best controll aside from Multiform.

Follower is somewhere in the middle. Moderately replaceable, moderately well controlled, but still an NPC.

Multiform gives you another sheet as well, but one that can't act "together" with your base form or any of your other alternate forms. And you usually have to write up the forms in advance."

Vehicle kind of belongs into that group too, making it a "Pentet"* of powers I guess.

 

*Is that the right word for "one of a group of 5"?

 

(But looking at it now, 3 pts isn't a bad investment to get that Duplicate back, is it? )

In a game where free duplication (not something like Astral Projection only*) is allowed, having a power to resurrect those duplicates should not be an issue. If the GM wants it.

As I said, the non-dispoability of Duplicates is a important balancing factor for having full Player control without questions and seperate actions for that Duplicate (abilities neitehr summon, follower, nor Multiform share).

 

*Not that astral projectn can also be done using APG rules, Desolid in particular. So using duplication in those cases is not even nessesary anymore anyway.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Duplicates stay death unless revivedd by build-in Regeneration or another Power" is a important balance factor.

 

Flexibility is paid for in the points; you pay to have those alternate and additional abilities, just like with a Power Pool.  Nobody argues that you have to lose points permanently at any point with a power pool to offset all that flexibility.  They don't do so because that would be ridiculous.  Any power that has with it the inherent chance of permanently losing points from your character sheet like the GM came and ripped a piece off should have a limitation -- should cost less than usual -- not be a built-in feature.

[Christopher]

Flexibility is paid for in the points; you pay to have those alternate and additional abilities, just like with a Power Pool.  Nobody argues that you have to lose points permanently at any point with a power pool to offset all that flexibility.  They don't do so because that would be ridiculous.  Any power that has with it the inherent chance of permanently losing points from your character sheet like the GM came and ripped a piece off should have a limitation -- should cost less than usual -- not be a built-in feature.

So you want to double the price, then slap a mandatory "will permanently loose points if duplicated does" limitation on it?

Where is summons "must win a Ego Roll against the summoned being" Limitation then? I mean that should also not "be build into it." A wild summon could kill your character after all.

Where is an attacks "Must hit target with OCV vs DCV, OMCV vs ODCV or AoE attack" Limitation? Missing that attack could kill you character too, after all.

 

I already gave you the comparision "Duplicate Permanent Death" is equal too "Ego Roll on Summon".

It is build into both powers and only both powers, because without it the base price would have to be higher.

[Surrealone]

Any power that has with it the inherent chance of permanently losing points from your character sheet like the GM came and ripped a piece off should have a limitation -- should cost less than usual -- not be a built-in feature.

You state your opinion as if it were fact when, in fact, it flies in the face of RAW.  So, just as I asked Hugh (in order to test his consistency on this matter), I'll ask you: Favors too?  If so, how do you reduce the cost to less than 1 CP with a Limitation?  Or -- if not, why not ... and what about other Perks -- all of which are, per RAW, considered transitory in nature and potentially lost due to character actions?

[Christopher R Taylor]

So you want to double the price, then slap a mandatory "will permanently loose points if duplicated does" limitation on it?

 

Or, you could just drop the rule which is silly and unwarranted.  Its not there as a balancing feature.  Its there because in the comics, when the most famous one (in the Legion of Superheroes) had a duplicate died, she lost it forever.

 

That's it.  They were simulating comics.  But it was a poor simulation better done with an optional limitation "duplicates die permanently" probably a 1/4, given how rarely anyone dies in the Superhero genre.  And you don't see duplication many other places.

 

I can't see why anyone would even argue this.  Taking points away from a character permanently, making them fewer total points than everyone else in the campaign permanently just because they bought a certain power is utterly ridiculous.

 

and what about other Perks -- all of which are, per RAW, considered transitory in nature and potentially lost due to character actions?

 

The only perk that says this is Deep Cover.  The rest give ways to shift the points to something else.  Even Deep Cover offers an optional "or you could let them put the points somewhere else."  Option.

 

Just because the rules are written a certain way doesn't make them right or scribed in stone by God on high.  That's why the cost of things change over editions.

[Duke Bushido]

*Is that the right word for "one of a group of 5"?

If not, it should be!

 

Though I wasn't suggesting using the 3-pt build in a campaign where Dupes were eventually allowed to just reappear. I was referring to using it in a campaign with Duplicate Perma-death. Thus, each Dupe buys the 3 pt "Extra Life" for gone-is-gone points and can "survive" one death.

 

Flexibility is paid for in the points; you pay to have those alternate and additional abilities, just like with a Power Pool.  Nobody argues that you have to lose points permanently at any point with a power pool to offset all that flexibility.  They don't do so because that would be ridiculous.  Any power that has with it the inherent chance of permanently losing points from your character sheet like the GM came and ripped a piece off should have a limitation -- should cost less than usual -- not be a built-in feature.

So why am I the only one who has this problem with regard to HtH?

[Surrealone]

 

I can't see why anyone would even argue this.  Taking points away from a character permanently, making them fewer total points than everyone else in the campaign permanently just because they bought a certain power is utterly ridiculous.

It is ridiculous only to someone who apparently doesn't want players to have any risks.  What fun is it if you always know everything will work out OK and there's no pain or consequence of poor decisions?  That's a bit too much like masturbation without the, ahem, payoff, IMHO.
 

Besides, what you claim to be ridiculous is exactly how Favors work.  Per RAW, a 1CP Favor "Gives a character a one-time Contact with a 14- roll; after the character uses the Favor, it’s gone." (CC pg 37)  So you lose that 1CP forever when you use the Favor.  Why is that so ridiculous; should Favors be a revolving door?

 

Or your Duplicate dies because of actions you made it take in game ... meaning you have one less Duplicate due to the consequences of your decision(s) -- until you spend more CP on Duplication to get it back.  Why is THAT so ridiculous?  Should actions not have lasting consequences?

 

 

The only perk that says this is Deep Cover.  The rest give ways to shift the points to something else.  Even Deep Cover offers an optional "or you could let them put the points somewhere else."

See the Favor verbiage I quoted, above.  Favors are clearly transitory in nature and potentially lost due to character actions (i.e. use of the Favor) -- with no way to get them back aside from buying more with additional CP.  Also, the general description for (all) Perks says, "Perks are more transitory in nature than most character abilities, with characters often gaining and losing Perks during the course of the campaign. For example, mistreating a Contact can cause the character to lose that Contact, doing something completely out of character can cause a Deep Cover to be “blown,” a Follower can die during an adventure, a Fringe Benefit can be lost by leaving the organization that granted it, a Vehicle or Base can be destroyed, and so on."  (CC pg 36).

 

So no, contrary to your opinion, Deep Cover is, per RAW, not the only Perk that is transient and can be lost.  It's very clear from the RAW text above that vehicles, bases, fringe benefits, money, contacts, etc. are all "at risk" CP expenditures whose continued possession/use depends a lot on in-game actions/choices.  Nowhere within the above verbiage does it say there is any kind of Law of Conversation of CP regarding the earning/loss of CP or CP expenditures on abilities.

 

I'll also call attention to 'than most', which I colourized, above, to underscore its presence.  Let us look at context and notice it doesn't say 'all'.  This is clear indication that other character abilities (e.g. Duplication!) can and/or will have transitory natures, too, in terms of what you get for what you spend on them.  If it were otherwise, then the attorney/lawyer who authored the rules would have used 'all' instead of 'most', here...

Rhetorical Mental Exercise:
​If you spend CP on an ability you lost, where did your CP go?  I'll answer with an analogy that a reasonable person would likely consider logical, realistic, fair, and appropriate: The CP obviously goes to the same place your money goes when you spend money on something that you then lose in the real world; it doesn't magically reappear in your wallet or any other usable place.  Note that you might, perchance, find that which you previously lost if you take appropriate actions -- but no action you take short of finding what you lost and selling it for what you paid for it will cause the money you spent to reappear and/or permit you to use it again.

 

 

 

Or, you could just drop the rule which is silly and unwarranted.  Its not there as a balancing feature.  Its there because in the comics, when the most famous one (in the Legion of Superheroes) had a duplicate died, she lost it forever.

 

That's it.  They were simulating comics.  But it was a poor simulation better done with an optional limitation "duplicates die permanently" probably a 1/4, given how rarely anyone dies in the Superhero genre.  And you don't see duplication many other places.

​...
 

Just because the rules are written a certain way doesn't make them right or scribed in stone by God on high.  That's why the cost of things change over editions.

 

So house rule it if you have a problem with it.  Done.  What's your need to insist that other people see it your way when the rules as written are what they are?  Do you need everyone to house rule it the way you would just because you would, or can you, perchance, accept the fact that some people are good with RAW as RAW???

​To re-use your tone in an appropriate response to your last sentence:
Just because you don't like or agree with how a rule is written doesn't make RAW wrong or you God on high over whether people should adhere to RAW.

 

[Duke Bushido]

My sincere apologies, Christopher.

 

Having just know re-read this thread, I realized that I had left out something I intended to address in my last response:

 

 

 

Even if you asume a very callous user that regards all his duplicates as "expendable"

Naruto.

 

Single most sadistic duplicator of all time.

 

(and they somehow go along with that)

And they _do_! That's the really messed up part! They might as well all be Mr. Meesix, the way they seem to happily crave their impending doom.

 

he would still run out of them eventually.

 

I don't care too much for Naruto, so as a sincere question, I have to ask if ever actually has run out of duplicates.

 

Asuming a duplicate, not a summon build of course.

That's a strong possibility. Isn't there a specific section of the write-up for Summon dedicated to summoning something akin to a small army? I am not where I can check for myself, I'm afraid.

 

 

Some would fear it. Some would jsut own it:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0571.html

Thanks again for that. I'm really enjoying it, though I've got to stay away until I get this bout of insomnia dealt with.

 

 

 

 

I think its a nod to Triplicate Lass who lost a copy permanently in the comics.

 

I think we can figure out if that's actually the case, but I'm going to need a little help from more knowledgeable people:

 

I make no secret of the fact that I wasn't raised on comic books, and never really developed a great love for the as an adult (except Super Boxers. Super Boxers was awesome! ).

 

I don't care who Triplicate Girl was (Google just finished telling me that anyway). Can anyone tell us precisely what year her Triplicate died?

 

The earliest mention of "Gone is gone" for dear, dead duplicates is 1984, when the power first appeared in the supplement titled "Champions III." Did she die before that? If so, then you may have something with the possibility of emulation. If not, then it's also possible that it was added in there as a meta mechanic for balance: to reduce the possibility of one player shutting the door on the rest of the table by whipping out a dozen character sheets.

 

 

If you lose your points permanently, that's worth a limitation.

 

When your character dies, you lose all your points. What Limitation is given freely to all players all the time from character generation until death / retirement? -1/8? -75? We've got 2 choices here. We can assume it's built into the cost already (which you admit you don't like), or we can assume it's -0, as so many things are.

 

Well, we've got a couple of other options: We can make everything free, or equally change the price of everything, because you can lose everything at any time:

 

Drain, move way, way up the time chart.

 

Suppress, same time chartiness.

 

Transform: Powerful PC into 12-pc gizzard snack with tater logs and hot sauce.

 

Death: the big "I lost everything, all at once, and so I should rearrange my character sheet with all the points I just freed up."

 

Or "Since I've finally died, I'm going to use the 700 points I had in that fifteen year old character to make a new one. Points don't go away, right?"

 

 

Or--

 

and this one, at least to me, makes a lot of sense:

 

From Champions (the very first one; page 29): "Modifications that raise a Power's total effectiveness are called Power Advantages."

 

 

Now I realize that I'm just an old man with no clue who to properly design a game, but if I were to think about it a spell, I think I would be forced to admit that a Power that can't be taken away from you.... That's one heck of an Advantage, right there. Can it be Drained? No! I mean, you can drain it, even put my recovery rate at one point per century, but I'll have it right back by the next session anyway.

Can it be suppressed? No! I mean, you _can_, but I'll have it back the very next combat!

Can it be transformed? Well, the character can, but he's always going to have this power when he wants. I mean, gizzard dinners don't very often want powers, but it'll be there, just in case.

Can I lose it through death? No! Even death won't stop it. If I die, my Duplicates administer perfect CPR while two more duplicates start applying to med schools so they can save my life. And if they die, well it doesn't matter, because I'm Naruto! I'll have them back so fast it's like they never left!

 

 

That's a _huge_ Advantage, right there. Frankly, I think it would make Duplication too much to even consider. I'm thinking ... I don't know. maybe something like this:

 

Naruto-style instantly-replaceable duplicates: +24.

 

Of maybe just a 90 point adder.

 

 

 

 

You've got two sides of this rule:

 

A Limitation that doesn't limit isn't worth any points. As perma-death for a duplicate doesn't make your version of duplication any more limited than anyone else's version of Duplication (since they're all built that way), then it's not worth any points. Sticking to the very letter of the oldest rule of Champions (well, that one, and Energy Blast costs 5pts/D6), your proposed Limitation is -0.

 

A power that gains effectiveness (and I think what are effectively immortal, self-replacing duplicates are _way_ more effective than the regular ones) takes an Advantage.

 

 

Now all kidding aside (seriously; I'm trying to lighten the mood here. It seems like you're being snowballed a bit, so I thought I'd try to toss a little humor in the reply), what do you (or anyone else) see such an Advantage being worth?

 

 

Though, for what it's worth, my own opinion on why "the cost of things changes over editions" is because the new author is a bit of a power gamer and what our Australian friends seem to call a "wombat." Look closely over the years at exactly _what_ changes. Everything becomes more and more combat effective; multiple power attacks suddenly let you spray everything in the universe with everything you've got, Autofire lets you fill the room with lead yet somehow teach the bullets to dodge all the good guys, and not only are Endurance costs half of what they used to be, it's insanely cheap to eliminate them all together. Yet Shapeshift costs more than a planet-sized base and enhanced senses might require a buying group. [as far as I know, none of this may be relevant after 5e the First; re-Fred may have fixed all this]

 

 

Now I only suggested that you look at that so that you can rationalize:

 

The same guy (guys?) who gave the game a _serious_ combat-effectiveness at radically reduced rates is (are?) the same guy / guys who think that dead things should stay that way.

 

Is it God-like? Is it written in stone? Nah. I've already mentioned above that I've got players like you, and miraculously reappearing dead guys is the concession I make to shut them up. However, I totally don't expect anyone else to do it. Moreover, I'm likely to never sit down and play a game with any of the people on this board (more's the pity; there are so many people here I'd like to meet ) With that in mind, it really doesn't matter to me if they do things the way I do or if they think I'm the second-biggest idiot they've ever met.

 

However, the thread was about some creative and inexpensive ways to make duplicates.

 

Thus far, Doc Democracy is not just way, way ahead of all the rest of us, but the only one who really seems to want to be on topic.

 

If you have a cross to bear, do what Doc Democracy and many others have done: start a topic for that conversation. I _promise_ you that there are people who will happily discuss this with you.

 

 

Duke