House Rule: Modified Trigger

[Mister E]

So, problems I have with Trigger. Take a look at this:

 

Disintegrate

5 points of Blast NND: electricity defences (+1) Does Body (+1)

Trigger + ¼

Automatic reset takes no time to reset + ½

Activating trigger takes no time + ¼

Two trigger conditions + ¼ (whatever is grabbed or being grabbed)

 

 

Total +3 1/4 1 (20 active points)

 

Concentration (0 DCV Completely Unaware) - ¾

Extra time 1 Turn -1 ¼

Two handed gestures – ½

Incantations – ¼

Extra Endurance – 10x END (costs 20 END) - 4

 

Total -6 ¾ (3 real points)

 

What it appears to do, unless they have NND immunity, is completely destroy them: the trigger goes off, they take 1 Body, it resets (no time) and activates again (no time) and they take 1 Body. Rinse and repeat until they are dead, all instantly. Boom.

 

Sure it is a real effort to turn on, but the activation conditions DO NOT APPLY when the power goes off because you only need them to set the trigger, not to keep it resetting.

 

An abuse? Yes. Of course. Legal though…actually SPECIFICALLY legal. It specifically says this is OK, so it may LOOK abusive but, well, it’s fine.

"Don't tread on me."

 

So the Trigger activates (whatever is grabbed or being grabbed).

 

Shouldn't this be, "whenever grabbed or being grabbed"?

 

So that the act of grabbing or being grabbed is what sets off the Trigger?

[Sean Waters]

"Don't tread on me."

 

So the Trigger activates (whatever is grabbed or being grabbed).

 

Shouldn't this be, "whenever grabbed or being grabbed"?

 

So that the act of grabbing or being grabbed is what sets off the Trigger?

 

It could be; but that's part of the problem: the way you define the trigger massively affects utility.  You could have 'having something in a grab or being in a grab'.  Your definition would arguably only allow the trigger to go off once per grab, but a bit of rewording allows it to go off constantly as long as the grab is in effect.

 

The breadth of the utility should be taken into account in the cost.  It isn't.

[Doc Democracy]

If the OAF is usable by others, we could have it usable by others??


Doc
 

It doesn't do that. It is a power bought by the person who bought it and does not have UBO on it. All the trigger advantage does is allow you to ignore the substantial activation conditions that you are getting a cost break for.
 

[Mister E]

"Sometimes I Just Electricute People":

 

1d6 Blast, NND (+1; Electrical Defenses),

Does BODY (+1);

 

Total = 15 active pts

 

No Range (-1/2),

No Conscious Control (-1; GM controls when power goes off).

 

Total = 6 real pts

 

This way yes the power can go off whenever

& as many times as the GM wants.

 

I might go off at any time. It might not.

 

The character has no control.

[Sean Waters]

"Sometimes I Just Electricute People":

 

1d6 Blast, NND (+1; Electrical Defenses),

Does BODY (+1);

 

Total = 15 active pts

 

No Range (-1/2),

No Conscious Control (-1; GM controls when power goes off).

 

Total = 6 real pts

 

This way yes the power can go off whenever

& as many times as the GM wants.

 

I might go off at any time. It might not.

 

The character has no control.

 

I'm assuming that should have had 'trigger' in there?  If not then a NCC Damage Shield would work fine.  Yes, quite: trigger allows a power to be used lots of times a turn.  I am questioning what game need that addresses.

[Sean Waters]

If the OAF is usable by others, we could have it usable by others??

 

 

Doc

 

 

OK, this is a whole other can of worms.  I screaming well HATE the focus modifier because it is a hybrid advantage/limitation.

 

LIMITATIONS SHOULD NOT BE ADVANTAGES.  We have a mechanism for allowing others to use your powers.  We do not need another, seperate, rule in the Focus section.

 

However, as the rules stand, yes, we can use the Focus limitation as a UBO advantage, and get a cost break for doing so, for pity's sakes.  This is not clarified in the example of the power, because we wouldn't want people understanding how Hero works, or anything.

 

Nonetheless that was a secondary point to the post - the main reason for having 'trigger' is to sidestep all those lengthy and complicated start-up conditions you got an enormous cost break for.  Trigger allows you to deal with all that non-combat when start-p limitations do not matter.  One more reason to question how well thought through all this has been.

[steriaca]

Ok. If a power has Trigger, then Incarnations, Gesters, and Extra Time become +0 power advantages instead of power limitations. Limitations which do not really limit the power are no longer limitations and are worth no points.

 

Any other power limitations are negated by Trigger?

[Doc Democracy]

OK, this is a whole other can of worms.  I screaming well HATE the focus modifier because it is a hybrid advantage/limitation.

 

LIMITATIONS SHOULD NOT BE ADVANTAGES.  We have a mechanism for allowing others to use your powers.  We do not need another, seperate, rule in the Focus section.

 

However, as the rules stand, yes, we can use the Focus limitation as a UBO advantage, and get a cost break for doing so, for pity's sakes.  This is not clarified in the example of the power, because we wouldn't want people understanding how Hero works, or anything.

 

Nonetheless that was a secondary point to the post - the main reason for having 'trigger' is to sidestep all those lengthy and complicated start-up conditions you got an enormous cost break for.  Trigger allows you to deal with all that non-combat when start-p limitations do not matter.  One more reason to question how well thought through all this has been.

 

Ha!  A sensitive spot obviously.  I think we can make a decent argument for the focus limitation - it is all about the value of the limitation (+0) always being a potential.

 

I want to be able to make potions that anyone can use.  It does not make sense for those only to be usable by me and if I am carrying them, the fact that someone can steal them off me or break the focus and deprive me of their use, makes them worth less than they might otherwise be. I had never considered the fact that OAF provide a UBO as part of it but I reckon they consider it a wash when a usable focus can be used by opponents or friends.

 

Doc

[steriaca]

On focus...don't forget that you can't always control WHO can use your built in Usable By Others. There is a way around it. First, define it as a personal focus. Then, add a naked Usable By Others advantage to the focused power. Then you can decied who can use it or not.

[Crusher Bob]

However, as the rules stand, yes, we can use the Focus limitation as a UBO advantage, and get a cost break for doing so, for pity's sakes.  This is not clarified in the example of the power, because we wouldn't want people understanding how Hero works, or anything.

Hmm, UBO one other or grantor is only (+1/4), right? And that can't be used by the bad guys. So, a UBO (+1/4) that anyone who takes away your focus can use may well be (+0)...

 

Nonetheless that was a secondary point to the post - the main reason for having 'trigger' is to sidestep all those lengthy and complicated start-up conditions you got an enormous cost break for.  Trigger allows you to deal with all that non-combat when start-p limitations do not matter.  One more reason to question how well thought through all this has been.

You get half price for 'extra time - only to start' on constant powers, I'd assume a similar modifier on things to set up a trigger.

[Mister E]

Can anyone give an example of something (other than booby traps) that you can only build with Trigger as it is? I don't mean a build, I mean a concept, like counter-punching, or dodging or whatever.

Contingency the D&D spell that allows another spell to be triggered.

[steriaca]

Counterpunch (Block, trigger attack). Bombs (push the hand plunger and boom). Killer Queen from Jojo is all about trigger (touch what Killer Queen touched and boom). Combo strikes (attack, trigger attack).