How to Teleport a target out of armor?

[Doc Democracy]

I think our first issue is defining armour.  HERO, when it comes down to it, is all about definitions.  We all know roughly what we are talking about, something that covers the body, providing protection from damage and other things.

 

The big problem is that we have so many ways of building that.  We need to make some decisions.  First, whether we presume a focus and if so, accessible or inaccessible.  In most builds I think armour comes out as an OIF.  As such, the player has specifically given you permission, under certain circumstances to take it off them (and to deprive them of all the powers associated with that focus).

 

The power the OP is talking about is, therefore, how that focus might be removed  but in less time than normal circumstances.

 

The big element is that an inaccessible focus can be removed in one turn if out of combat, an accessible focus can be removed by a grab roll.  Perhaps the way to do it is to change the focus from inaccessible to accessible?  

 

I am am thinking that if you could "drain" enough points to equal the difference of the powers in the armour being bought with OIF than with OAF.  A simple example

 

20 points of resistant defence, armour (OIF) - 30/1.5 = 20 points

20 points of resistant defence, armour (OAF) - 30/2 = 15 points

 

So by draining 5 points, I effectively make the armour accessible. I can now grab it from him. This is defensive so the effectiveness of any drain power is halved.

 

My thoughts on SFX for this is the sense used to teleport slowly defining what is the person and what is the armour before allowing them to be separated.

 

The more complex and powerful the armour, the more "drain" that has to be achieved before a "grab" can be attempted.

 

This is not as clean as the dispel option but I think it is more colourful.  And it treats the focus as a focus...

 

 

Doc

 

 

[Ninja-Bear]

8 hours ago, Hyper-Man said:

Are you talking about a FOCUS taking BODY or a FRAMEWORK power being DRAINED?  I was only talking about the later.

I’m talking about both.  Drain can be set to Drain Body. The rules for a focus taking Body doesn’t state what form of damage is required. Btw-if the GM is agreeable, you could put on the focus -0 acts as unified. Really I mean Defender took the linitation OIF: Armor, I don’t think it’s unreasonable.

[Hyper-Man]

I believe that the published versions of Defender are built with Only In Heroic Id instead of Focus.

[Ninja-Bear]

42 minutes ago, Hyper-Man said:

I believe that the published versions of Defender are built with Only In Heroic Id instead of Focus.

I’ll check when I’m able too.  Still based on SFX,  I can see it working on OIHI. 

[Doc Democracy]

17 hours ago, Hyper-Man said:

I believe that the published versions of Defender are built with Only In Heroic Id instead of Focus.

 

And that is the beauty of HERO while being one of its biggest frustrations.  It is actually, to my mind, a nod to the fact that HERO incorporated what is now recognised as a narrative gaming style way back then.  The player being able to control aspects of the narrative.

 

one player chooses to be able to teleport people out of their armour, another player chooses not to take the discount given by focus to ensure that he is not vulnerable to that kind of thing.

 

:-)

 

Doc

[Ninja-Bear]

Ok I think I did miss understand something about breaking focus. I thought that focus get a Body score based on Active points. If I’m reading the rules right, no just gotta beat DEF by a Body damaging attack so Drain would be highly effective.

[Cantriped]

51 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Ok I think I did miss understand something about breaking focus. I thought that focus get a Body score based on Active points. If I’m reading the rules right, no just gotta beat DEF by a Body damaging attack so Drain would be highly effective.

Despite being 'objects' by special effect, Foci do not have the same characteristics as actual Objects (I.E. BODY scores, size modifiers, mass, etc.), nor do they follow the general rules for Objects (which is why rules for damaging them get spelled out in the modifier's description instead). There are optional rules for giving Foci more object-like characteristics.

Since any amount of BODY damage renders functions inoperable, Penetrating Killing Attacks are especially effective against Foci.

 

On ‎11‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 11:54 AM, Knightgoblin said:

I’m sure this has been discussed several times before. But I couldn’t find the info and I’ve been wondering. How through the games rules (6e preferably) could someone teleport a power armor guy out of his armor?

Personally, I would probably use a Limited UAA Teleport. Since that literally does what you want it to do, and will work against any suit of Powered Armor built using the Focus or Vehicle rules. Powered Armor built using OIAID like Defender's (or without even that, like Doctor Destroyer's) are nearly impossible to be deprived of for any length of time. Dispel only allows you to turn off parts of the suit (most of which can be reactivated as Zero-Phase Actions), and Drain/Suppress only allows you to reduce/negate the effectiveness of parts of the suit for a limited time. 

Transforms can wreak havoc on almost any form of armor (as befits a Catch-All power); but one should probably use the rules for Adding or Removing powers to determine the threshold for successfully "transforming" the armor into "unequipped armor" (and I would require at least a Minor Transform to turn "Equipped Armor" into "Unequipped Armor").

Dispel can also work quite well for stripping off armor, but only if the Armor's Resistant Protection takes Extra Time (Only To Equip) so that it takes longer than a Zero-Phase to reactivate it (and so that there is a mechanical link between equipping the armor and activating it). This 'system' has the advantage that it gives players appropriate discounts for the additional vulnerability it creates, and a character can limit their vulnerability by acquiring armor that is Difficult To Dispel or has less Extra Time to equip. Or in a champions campaign, opt out of the system entirely like Defender does by not having his "Powered Armor" take any of the modifiers generally used to represent equipment of it's nature.

[Ninja-Bear]

Did some numbers. Defender in CC is bought as OIF. Defender has 15 PD/ED ACT Points.  So Dispel  at 8D6 culm. average roll would be 24 pts. It takes an average of two rolls for the Teleport to work.  I would say that the sfx of it taking multiple rolls would be that the Teleporter needs to get a good fix for it to work.

[Cantriped]

6 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Did some numbers. Defender in CC is bought as OIF. Defender has 15 PD/ED ACT Points.  So Dispel  at 8D6 culm. average roll would be 24 pts. It takes an average of two rolls for the Teleport to work.  I would say that the sfx of it taking multiple rolls would be that the Teleporter needs to get a good fix for it to work.

Defender (per CC 192) didn't take Extra Time (Only To Activate/Equip) on any of the powers bought through the Focus (Powered Armor). So regardless of the SFX of the Dispel, he can still reactivate his Resistant Protection as a Zero-Phase Action. Likewise, regardless of it's SFX, the Dispel cannot affect any of Defender's Weapons Array until he actually activates them, and even then can only Dispel the incoming attack if the character uses a Held Action to do so.

Defender's Powered Armor is 45 APs, and his Power Pack is 60 APs; which require 13d6 and 18d6 of Dispel respectively to knock them out in one shot; or 2 and 3 shots of your 8d6 Cumulative Dispel. Either way, both powers can be reactivated the following Phase (or even immediately if Defender is able to Abort An Action that segment).

[Ninja-Bear]

No Cantriped as per CC an object which is Dispelled can be considered broken And no longer functioning until repaired or replaced. Therefore logic states that it would take Defender longer than a zero phase action to turn it on. Speaking of logic his weapon array is defined as being part of his armor - see his OIF Powered Armor.-so it’s gone with the Armor. 

[Cassandra]

Mind Control Remove Your Armor/Shut Down Armor Powers Only Vs. Those Wearing Armor.

[Cantriped]

47 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

No Cantriped as per CC an object which is Dispelled can be considered broken And no longer functioning until repaired or replaced. Therefore logic states that it would take Defender longer than a zero phase action to turn it on. Speaking of logic his weapon array is defined as being part of his armor - see his OIF Powered Armor.-so it’s gone with the Armor. 

Nay. You are confusing a snippet of example text for an actual rule. All that Dispel allows you to do is "turn off another character's Power", period. In the example on CC 58 (and the further explanatory text further down), it is referring to the ability to ruin/destroy objects appropriately defined in a manner that Dispel can affect (which per the mechanics of Dispel, definitively requires that the creation of such objects be an effect of the power's activation). That example, and it's explanatory text, are not intended to act as rules text themselves, or to define new (and exceedingly overpowered) functions for Dispel that aren't otherwise supported by the rules in any way, shape, of form.

 

The only ways for Dispel to legally destroy an "object" are if said object is created as part of the activation of a power (and there are enough legal examples of such in CC to justify the existence of the contested example, and its explanatory text). For example, any items created using Transform, or the Alternate Magic Item Creation Rules (see Fantasy Hero), can be destroyed by Dispel since they are the lingering effects of the activation of a power, just like walls created by Barrier are. Similarly a Vehicle summoned using the Rules For Summoning Bases & Vehicles can be Banished with the appropriate Dispel like any other Summon). Finally, the context most likely in mind when the contested example was written: Any "potion-like objects" created using the Delayed Effect rules can be destroyed by Dispel; because a "prepared" Power counts as active (which means it can be Dispelled even if it isn't "in-use"). Delayed Effect shares with Dispel its roots in Fantasy Hero; where the former was intended to be used to create Potions and such, and the latter was intended to be able to break spells and destroy magically created objects. So it stands to reason they'd contain vestigial language which accommodates each other's existence. However, even in such cases, you are only able to use "destroying an object" as the SFX of the Dispel because "creating an object" was the defined special effect of using/preparing to use the power.

 

In other words, Dispel can sometimes be used to destroy objects, because sometimes the rules suggest creating them in a manner which is vulnerable to Dispel (Delayed Effect, Summon, Transform). That does not make all objects (such as Defender's OIF Powered Armor) vulnerable to destruction by Dispel; nor are there any concrete rules given for determining the success of Dispel when used to destroy Objects instead of turn off another character's Powers. Being able to guess at the rules for, or deduce semantically what the result would be of destroying a focus via Dispel, is not the same as being able to cite rules supporting the possibility.

[Cantriped]

4 minutes ago, Cassandra said:

Mind Control Remove Your Armor/Shut Down Armor Powers Only Vs. Those Wearing Armor.

Which is perfect if it makes sense for their EGO+Mental Defense to affect how hard it is to Teleport their Armor. In some contexts that construct will work just fine, in others not, so much. Although I do like that it achieves the desired result in a way that leaves a reasonably common defense.

[Thia Halmades]

Ehh. I’m with the board here, this is a mess of a question. Before an answer can be reached;

 

Define ‘power armor.”  Indirect was previously mentioned, and is correct, at a minimum.

Second, define the special effect of the teleport. Magic? Super tech? Mind Control to get them to take it off?

 

I get the concept — you want to disarm the big power of the target, but that isn’t how Hero “works.” Reasons being, first, they paid for that power suite, unified under a special effect. That’s a critical point, and was mentioned prior: it isn’t a single armor. It’s blast, armor, flight, shields, and sensors. Second, it’s generally accepted that teleport an unwilling target as a movement power is unallowed without violating at least one STOP. Third, and the most critical point in my mind, is that I wouldn’t allow any ‘auto win” ability that would rob a target of its 300 (or less, or more) power set. Can Loki teleport Stark out of an Iron Man suit? Sure, but those are unbuilt plot powers, not in game effects justified via payment.

 

All that said: this is a cumulative dispel, and I would point out that it would be prohibitively expensive and quite noticeable. The effect would need to disable all of the associated powers, not just a power or a multi power, but the entire suite. If done as a transform — Armored Target into Unarmored Target — it would need to be a total of the build or, double the body of the target. I would narrow this down into a cheaper scalpel, rather than attempting to kludge together this bludgeon.

[Ninja-Bear]

On 11/24/2017 at 10:29 AM, Hyper-Man said:

I believe that the published versions of Defender are built with Only In Heroic Id instead of Focus.

 Checked- Defender is built with OIF in 4th, 5th, 6th Basic and CC.

[Ninja-Bear]

19 hours ago, Thia Halmades said:

Ehh. I’m with the board here, this is a mess of a question. Before an answer can be reached;

 

Define ‘power armor.”  Indirect was previously mentioned, and is correct, at a minimum.

Second, define the special effect of the teleport. Magic? Super tech? Mind Control to get them to take it off?

 

I get the concept — you want to disarm the big power of the target, but that isn’t how Hero “works.” Reasons being, first, they paid for that power suite, unified under a special effect. That’s a critical point, and was mentioned prior: it isn’t a single armor. It’s blast, armor, flight, shields, and sensors. Second, it’s generally accepted that teleport an unwilling target as a movement power is unallowed without violating at least one STOP. Third, and the most critical point in my mind, is that I wouldn’t allow any ‘auto win” ability that would rob a target of its 300 (or less, or more) power set. Can Loki teleport Stark out of an Iron Man suit? Sure, but those are unbuilt plot powers, not in game effects justified via payment.

 

All that said: this is a cumulative dispel, and I would point out that it would be prohibitively expensive and quite noticeable. The effect would need to disable all of the associated powers, not just a power or a multi power, but the entire suite. If done as a transform — Armored Target into Unarmored Target — it would need to be a total of the build or, double the body of the target. I would narrow this down into a cheaper scalpel, rather than attempting to kludge together this bludgeon.

Respectfully I’m going to disagree with some points with the quotes points. First as far as I can remember Hero has always prided itself as you can do anything. (Yes I know there is a game balance to kept in mind and I thought I’d address it before).  Second as you pointed out the Defender paid points for his ability. I’ll also point out the he took focus limitationon said abilities. Armadillo is the poster child of why you shouldn’t buy all your powers through a focus. Third I posted some rough numbers and using Dispel isn’t an instant win. (Nor would I allow it to be. It not like other modifiers could not  be in place to make it useful against mooks but not against names characters.

 

This thread seems to me that people want to punish a character’s cool concept of T-porting a man out of his armor.  

 

Perhaps im wrong but afaik, if I used a killing attack and destroyed Defenders Armor, which I can in combat, then all the other powers bought through the same focus is broken? In fact I find it odd that no one seems to bat an eye that I can target an OIF in combat and destroy it but Dispelling it is an issue.

[Greywind]

Each attack that does body exceeding the suit's DEF will remove 1 power (the most expensive) from the armor.

[mrinku]

33 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Perhaps im wrong but afaik, if I used a killing attack and destroyed Defenders Armor, which I can in combat, then all the other powers bought through the same focus is broken? In fact I find it odd that no one seems to bat an eye that I can target an OIF in combat and destroy it but Dispelling it is an issue.

 

 

You're not entirely wrong - certainly an OIF can be targeted by an attack. But you can't individually target the powers themselves if they're bought as part of that overall focus. CC p105 says the order the powers are destroyed is determined by the GM, though as a rule powers that provide defences should be removed last.

[Ninja-Bear]

Fine, can’t seem to build a t-port man outta armor per se so here comes the cheese. 3D6 RKA with AVLD-Power Defense (?) plus AoE accurate to boot.. So every time you do Body to Defender or Armidillo, or any other PA guy, the armor does Body and poof there goes a Power. It’ll take awhile to completely strip a character like this but hey it can be done.

[IndianaJoe3]

2 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

This thread seems to me that people want to punish a character’s cool concept of T-porting a man out of his armor.  

 

The problem is there's no clear line between, "cool power concept" and, "'I win' button." It shouldn't be cheaper to teleport someone out of armor than to remove it via other methods.

[mrinku]

6 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Fine, can’t seem to build a t-port man outta armor per se so here comes the cheese. 3D6 RKA with AVLD-Power Defense (?) plus AoE accurate to boot.. So every time you do Body to Defender or Armidillo, or any other PA guy, the armor does Body and poof there goes a Power. It’ll take awhile to completely strip a character like this but hey it can be done.

 

Yep. Now you just need GM approval for that AVLD.

 

Personally I'd go with AP or Penetrating.

 

Edit: Especially since you also need the +1 STOP sign advantage Does Body for AVAD/AVLD to do other than STUN damage. That's something like 135 active points, you realise? Plus, I'm pretty sure even with an AoE you still need to target the OIF specifically. As written, the guy wearing the suit gets hit and excess body goes through to them, not the focus. It's the same deal as called shots. Even when playing with hit locations, an AoE doesn't automatically hit every location on a target.

[Doc Democracy]

I don't think it is an attempt to nerf a cool concept rather than a discussion on how much that should cost.

 

While the act of teleporting someone out if their armour in reality all comes to the same thing, it has a very variable effect when comparing teleporting batman out of his suit (which gives minimal resistant protection and a buff to PRE to teleporting Iron Man out of his suit which provides all of his powers.

 

In both cases the precision of the necessary teleport is the same but the game effect is wildly different.

 

The ultimate driver here would be for powersuit man to buy his suit as a patchwork of foci (cluttering up the character sheet) rather than OIF suit.

 

As I said earlier, the key thing would be that the power is seeking to circumvent the inaccessible element of the focus.  It is true that anyone who purchases a focus is essentially saying that they accept, at some point, they will be deprived of those powers.  By purchasing inaccessible, they might be aggrieved for that to happen in combat.  If they had used OAF (and taken the cost benefiit) then there could be no such hurt feelings.

 

You  could simply use an overwhelming transform, - switch from in armour to out of armour, the cure for which would be taking the time to put the armour on again.  That might be the measure for how much the ability should cost, regardless of the mechanic used to deliver the gameplay.

 

Doc

[megaplayboy]

I think Transform is the most straightforward.  Dispel would also work, but it can be pretty expensive to buy properly.  Teleport UOO, Indirect, would likely require targeting the armor at a penalty.  You might have to "sweep" the attack to teleport the entire suit.  

[Doc Democracy]

10 minutes ago, megaplayboy said:

I think Transform is the most straightforward.  Dispel would also work, but it can be pretty expensive to buy properly.  Teleport UOO, Indirect, would likely require targeting the armor at a penalty.  You might have to "sweep" the attack to teleport the entire suit.  

 

My biggest issue with using TP, whether UOO or not, is that there is no well tried and trusted method for defending against such things.  It is often there as an option because the SFX are obviously aligned with the mechanic.  However, as far as the game is concerned, this is not a matter of moving a character, it is a matter of depriving that character of powers that have been paid for.  To me, that cries out for an alternative game mechanic, one whose primary purpose is the deprivation of powers, not movement of the character.

 

Doc 

[Ninja-Bear]

10 hours ago, IndianaJoe3 said:

 

The problem is there's no clear line between, "cool power concept" and, "'I win' button." It shouldn't be cheaper to teleport someone out of armor than to remove it via other methods.

Did you not read any of my posts? Did you not see that Dispel sfx Teleport is really expensive? Did you not see where I’m trying to balance of having the power and not make it a insta win?