Dispel vs Gadgets & Electronics (CC)

[Christopher R Taylor]

Well ... the more I think about it the more the example I have in mind would already have an activation time anyway.  If you buy your armor with (takes x time to put on) then probably a dispel would require that re-activation time to start up again.

[Cantriped]

3 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Well ... the more I think about it the more the example I have in mind would already have an activation time anyway.  If you buy your armor with (takes x time to put on) then probably a dispel would require that re-activation time to start up again.

Yes exactly, for Heroic Campaigns (where the obscene potential CP savings are irrelevant) I give armor and weapons all of the Modifiers they logically deserve. Including Extra Time (Only to Activate), Obvious (usually to Sight & Hearing). I also use optional rules that calculate the BODY of Foci from their Mass (the same way you calculate any other object's BODY), and otherwise treat them just like objects. But I like detailed, granular builds, and would strictly control access to Dispels that can affect such equipment. I usually prefer SFX-based or highly limited Dispels for this reason; I find it hard to justify Dispel targeting Game Elements directly unless I'm also controlling access to that Game Element as well.

 

For a superheroic campaign that level of detail just isn't usually appropriate (or rather, useful). For such campaigns, I consider the amount of time required to put-on/take-off the suit to balance itself out (just like the pros and cons of Universal Foci), because generally speaking it will take an enemy just as long to get you out of the suit as it took you to get into the suit. Those extra Turns, Minutes, whatever may be the difference between Defender ending up with a Public Identity (or in the super-obituaries), and escaping with his secret (or life). However, generally I wouldn't use one-shot mechanics that can strip of character of their powered-armor in such a campaign either. Being rendered powerless by something you have little-to-no chance of defending against and cannot recover from in time to be useful isn't a very fun way to spend an afternoon.

[mrinku]

Of course if you buy the suit as a vehicle, Dispel can't touch its inherent PD or other inherent powers, though it can turn off added ones that aren't purchased with Inherent. 

[Ninja-Bear]

Looked up Dispel in Hero System Basic and Where it talks about being more effective against certain things, about objects must be repaired or replaced. So yeah no zero phase reactivation for objects.

[mrinku]

Or rercharged.

 

The actual requirements to get an object back in use are informed by the special effects and other characteristics of both the object and the Dispel power. One thing Dispel does NOT say is that destroying objects is required. And if that happens to be the described special effect, it should not be usable against indestructible objects (unless it also happens to be the object's defined weakness). This is not a trivial point, since Dispels in a fantasy setting may routinely come up against indestructible artefacts, and may be better defined as power drain effects.

[Ninja-Bear]

Took me a few reads to get what you are saying and yes we are in agreement. I took the power description as meaning regular objects and I believe that I mentioned that under focus rules would also determine what affect Dispel would have on said object. 

[Hyper-Man]

FWIW, Steve's new Gun Fu PDF has a great example of Dispel being used as the mechanism to take a semiautomatic pistol  apart while still in an opponent's hand. 

[mrinku]

You could build disarming as a Dispel as well. Resetting the power would require recovering the weapon. I'm sure that's been thought of before.

 

Normally I'd just build on the existing Disarm maneuver, maybe using TK, but Dispel may work better when STR vs STR isn't appropriate (e.g. disarming by heating the sword so that the user drops it).

[Ninja-Bear]

Mrinku I believe in the Gun Fu example by Hyperman, to use the Gun would require to reassemble the gun providing you have all the parts.  

[mrinku]

I wasn't using that example, but defining my own Dispel with a different special effect (making a weapon too hot to handle). I assume the Gun Fu Dispel probably has a few modifiers on it.

 

For that matter "taking a gun apart" is hardly going to Dispel a sword. Knocking a weapon out of the target's hand, or making it too hot to grip is more universal - but also more easily recoverable from.

[Ninja-Bear]

mrinku why would I define a Dispel as hot enough to drop a weapon why I can define it as melting and make it unusable till you get a new one?

[mrinku]

Because you may not want to destroy the hands of the target, for a start, or maybe your powers wouldn't reasonably allow that to happen (you need to heat steel to around 1300-1500 C to actually melt it, but I defy anyone to hang on to metal heated to 100 C with their bare hands...). There may also be a reason that you need that item intact.

 

"Unhand the crown of Kings, varlet!"

"Never!"

(Mumbles, points wand)

"Centarius Celsius!"

"Aaargh!"

*Clang!*

 

But I just picked that as an example. Another special effect that might do the job is an electrical zap that causes the hand to spasm and drop the tool.

 

And all this gets back to the point I've been banging on for the whole thread in that Dispel only turns a power off. How it gets turned back on isn't defined by the effect, but informed by the chosen special effects.

[Ninja-Bear]

I know this is very late in the thread but to clairify a point I was making about “Breaking” an object, if you read about breaking objects in CC, there is a difference between an object that is broken-Non functioning and completely destroyed. I am only going for the broken description/effect not completely destroyed. I was using break and destroyed interchangeably perhaps I shouldn’t have.

[steriaca]

Generally speaking Ninja-Bear, when something is broken, it still exists and can be fixed, but can not function. When something is destroyed, at the carry least, it still exists but can never be fixed to function, regardless of how high your skills are (with the exception of impossible skill role penatly or powers).

[Ninja-Bear]

2 hours ago, steriaca said:

Generally speaking Ninja-Bear, when something is broken, it still exists and can be fixed, but can not function. When something is destroyed, at the carry least, it still exists but can never be fixed to function, regardless of how high your skills are (with the exception of impossible skill role penatly or powers).

Steriaca that was my understanding in the beginning of the thread. And is reasonable however it seems to me that some on the thread confused the terms.

[mrinku]

Keep in mind that some objects are consumables. That sort of thing often makes sense for the object to be destroyed.

 

For example, a sacrificial goat might be the focus for an evil spell to summon a demon. A Dispel Summoning might be built which has the special effect of killing the goat. The goat is destroyed (killed) rather than broken (wounded).

 

Dispel RKA (i.e. for use against arrows) is probably a better example. That might have the effect of destroying the missile, meaning that particular shot won't be recoverable, and would require replacement. (This is actually a neat approach, as Dispel has a specific built in interrupt ability with held actions which does not rely on the normal Block procedure or Missile Deflection, just sufficient Dispel power vs the attack's active points).

[Cantriped]

 

On ‎11‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 4:28 PM, mrinku said:

For example, a sacrificial goat might be the focus for an evil spell to summon a demon. A Dispel Summoning might be built which has the special effect of killing the goat. The goat is destroyed (killed) rather than broken (wounded).

That doesn't make much sense. If you try to use the power to banish the demon after it has been summoned, you must target either the Summoner or the Summoned Being to do so (not any Foci involved). Further, since the Goat was probably an Expendable Foci, it was already destroyed when the Demon was summoned. Such a dispel would only make sense if you could use it to interrupt the Summoning after the costs have been paid (including 'expending' one Goat), but before the Summoned Being appeared. However you cannot, the clause in Dispel you refer to only allows you to "Dispel an incoming attack", and since a summoned being isn't an "incoming attack" it doesn't apply. 

 

On ‎11‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 4:28 PM, mrinku said:

Dispel RKA (i.e. for use against arrows) is probably a better example. That might have the effect of destroying the missile, meaning that particular shot won't be recoverable, and would require replacement. (This is actually a neat approach, as Dispel has a specific built in interrupt ability with held actions which does not rely on the normal Block procedure or Missile Deflection, just sufficient Dispel power vs the attack's active points).

I wouldn't allow Dispel RKA to "completely destroy" the projectiles, it would have to simply deflect them because the recoverability of the Projectile is defined by how Launcher is built. For example: If "arrows" are represented by Expendable Foci (in addition to the Launcher itself), than they are completely destroyed when used, regardless of the outcome of said use. If "arrows" are represented by Recoverable Charges, than they are recoverable when used, regardless of the outcome of said use.

[Ninja-Bear]

Demons I would have a phy lim: Can be dispelled. That seems to be the easiest way to depict what is seen in media.

[Cantriped]

8 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Demons I would have a phy lim: Can be dispelled. That seems to be the easiest way to depict what is seen in media.

The RAW already lets you target the Summoned Being with Dispel to banish them (your result, minus their power defense, must overcome the APs of the power used to summon them). What I was saying is that you cannot generally Banish a Summoned Being by targeting the Focus used to Summon them (I would think that would be an additional Limitation on the Summon power itself.

[mrinku]

6 hours ago, Cantriped said:

I wouldn't allow Dispel RKA to "completely destroy" the projectiles, it would have to simply deflect them because the recoverability of the Projectile is defined by how Launcher is built. For example: If "arrows" are represented by Expendable Foci (in addition to the Launcher itself), than they are completely destroyed when used, regardless of the outcome of said use. If "arrows" are represented by Recoverable Charges, than they are recoverable when used, regardless of the outcome of said use.

 

But HOW those charges are recovered is circumstantial (all CC says is "when appropriate"). Your recoverable charge arrow that misses and flies off into a lava pit isn't coming back. Or the one that hits a dragon who flies off and is never seen again. You can replace them back at base or other resupply point, but that also applies to a Dispel Arrow power that damages or destroys them. Heck, even at the best of times an arrow that misses can break, or get trodden on before you have a chance to retrieve it. Not to mention defences that work by disintegrating incoming attacks, warriors that block arrows by slicing them in half with their  blade, or  simply having to leave the area and never getting a chance to recover the arrows in the first place.

 

And yeah, the goat idea was dumb. I was trying for an example where destroying required components would shut down a continuing power, or allow a Dispel on a summon during a long prep time. But I guess even then you actually don't need a power to do that - just kill the goat, or kick over the candles, or shoot the cultists.

[Cantriped]

1 hour ago, mrinku said:

But HOW those charges are recovered is circumstantial (all CC says is "when appropriate"). Your recoverable charge arrow that misses and flies off into a lava pit isn't coming back. Or the one that hits a dragon who flies off and is never seen again.

To be fair, all I said was that I personally wouldn't allow the Dispel to completely destroy physical projectiles. The ones that don't fall into pits of lava or the like after being Dispelled should still be recoverable if those projectiles represent Recoverable Charges.

[mrinku]

Oh, sure, but the defined special effect of the Dispel is important too.

 

That may be related to other things... The Human Torch or a Pyromancer isn't going to build a Dispel RKA that knocks missiles aside - he's going to burn them. Conversely, a wind spell IS going to knock them aside.

[Surrealone]

On ‎11‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 10:54 PM, Hyper-Man said:

FWIW, Steve's new Gun Fu PDF has a great example of Dispel being used as the mechanism to take a semiautomatic pistol  apart while still in an opponent's hand. 

Said example is still too dependent on GM interpretation ... since 6e1 p193 states, "The victim of a Dispel may “restart” the Dispelled power, but he has to start from scratch — he must perform any preparations again." ... and the only "preparation" for using a firearm tends to be aiming it (since most people don't take "Extra Time: Some Assembly Required" or other similarly-inane limitation on their firearm RKAs).  Said example still also permits Dispel to be used as a defense against an incoming attack (also per 6e1 p193) since Steve took no limitation to preclude doing so -- which is a bit of a problem since Dispelling the incoming attack works on the attack, itself, not the focus that generated it .... and thus, SFX-wise shouldn't be possible if the sole purpose of the Dispel is disassembly.

 

Put another way:
I think it's actually a pretty crappy example of Dispel being used to disassemble a focus -- as it relies on too much GM interpretation and lacks a key limitation that should logically be placed upon the Dispel power for its mechanics to match the intended SFX.

 

Surreal

 

P.S. You've been pushing the Gun Fu book for whatever reason.  (You've actually been pushing it hard enough by mentioning it over and over ... that it is beginning to feel like you have some stake in it.)  Frankly, as a certified firearms instructor and self-proclaimed hoplophile, I was completely underwhelmed by the Gun Fu book.  I expected more 'gun' and less 'fu' ... since we have martial artsy stuff coming out the ying-yang for Hero Games ...while we have precious little that really hones in on firearms and their related crafts (which are not, I repeat, not martial arts -- but can pair reasonably well with martial arts).  Had I been given a glimpse/preview into the Gun Fu book before buying, I'd have saved my cash. It's just not all that, IMHO.

[Hyper-Man]

I think real weapon on guns covers many of those concerns.

[mrinku]

You could also define the dispel as working by ejecting the gun's magazine. That would certainly fall under the effect of causing the user to have to preform his preparations again (i.e. reload it).

 

Or magically making all the bullets duds.

 

Actually, remotely engaging the safety catch without the shooter noticing would also fall under what you could expect Dispel to do. Especially suitable for your "hex" or "luck" based powers... possibly even to the extent that the special effect is that the shooter "just forgot to take off the safety" or "didn't check their magazine was loaded".