Jump to content
BoloOfEarth

Those Are Some Weak Buckles and Straps (Multi-Disarm)

Recommended Posts

I've created a Luck character and would like to know how to write up a power that removes multiple accessible foci at once. 

 

For example, Soldier Sam has a rifle, plus a holstered pistol and sheathed knife on his weapon belt, and four grenades hanging from his combat harness and all bought as OAFs.  Lucky Lass hits poor Sam with her bad luck power, hoping to cause him to drop his rifle and have the belt and combat harness fall off him.

 

My inclination is to have 20 STR TK, AoE (2m Radius Accurate Selective; +1), Invisible to Sight (+1/2); Only to Disarm (-1?).  But would that do what I'm looking for? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I see it, the trouble with your proposed approach is that it's all or nothing ... meaning it either works or it doesn't against all Focii … whereas you indicated what you wanted was something Lucky Lass was 'hoping to cause him to drop his rifle and have his belt and combat harness fall off him'.  To me, your 'hoping to' qualifier was read as indicating the power should NOT be all/nothing … and that there should be a chance for an unlucky event to happen to each of the Focii, rather than it affecting all of them ... or none of them.

Thus, instead of an AoE I would expect this to look something more like a Multiple Attack against each Focus (taking the penalty for targeting a Focus, of course … and the Multiple Attack penalty) … and using an appropriate power (TK? Martial Disarm? Whatever fits your special effects, really...) against each Focus you wanted to Disarm from the target.

 

I definitely don't see Only to Disarm as -1 on the TK; more like -1/2 … but that's really up to your GM, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going with Bolo on this. With a 20 Str, it's quite possible the TK might be resisted, hence the "hope" part. However, being that it's invisible and I assume sample Sam won't see it, it'll probably succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your input. 

 

To clarify, I figured that it's not "all or nothing", in that I envisioned the target using his STR to resist the TK (effectively, keeping the foci from falling to the ground) for each OAF item.  I realize this doesn't make perfect logical sense (why is a stronger guy better able to keep his stuff from falling?) but at least it gives the target some way to resist the power, which I didn't think my initial idea of a 1m Teleport, Usable as Attack at Range (+1 3/4), AoE (2m Radius Accurate Selective; +1) really allowed.  Although in retrospect maybe have the "reasonably common defense" of the UAA being the target making DEX rolls to "resist" the Teleportation of each foci...

 

The problem I have with Suppress or Drain is that either one most likely only suppresses / drains part of the power, which logically doesn't make sense.  You drop your gun, and now instead of 2d6 RKA it's only 1d6+1???  An AoE 2m radius Dispel vs. all OAF powers might work, with "reactivating" the powers involving picking them up.  (But now I'm having flashbacks of the thread about teleporting someone out of his armored battlesuit. *shudder*)

 

Using either TK (AoE Accurate), or UAA Teleport (AoE Accurate), with Multiple Attack is an idea.  I'd need to make either one 0 END or using it to take away more than a few foci would knock the poor lass out. 

 

Anyway, all of this is food for thought.  Thanks again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A side issue is actually specifically mentioned...6E1 p. 303.  Teleport, UOO:

 

Quote

(He could, however, Disarm someone by Teleporting a weapon or other object out of the victim’s grasp, though he probably suffers an OCV penalty for targeting such a small object.) 

 

A rifle's got at least a -2 to hit;  a grenade's probably -6.  (Off the top of my head w/o cross referencing.)  This is a potential issue regardless of the actual attack definition, if it's targeted.  I'm not a fan of the AoE notion, saying oh I can affect everything all at once.....no.  You're asking for a form of multi-attack AND trying to  get a limit on it by claiming it's only vs. foci.

 

With teleport...the effect more or less fits, and whole objects are being teleported so it's legal...but it's pretty cheesy.  Even if there's a campaign rule saying minimum Teleport 5m, the baseline's only 5 points.  Even HEAVY advantages won't make it very expensive and it's basically unresistable.  

 

I agree with OP's assessment on the drain/suppress.  Doesn't act correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, unclevlad said:

With teleport...the effect more or less fits, and whole objects are being teleported so it's legal...but it's pretty cheesy.  Even if there's a campaign rule saying minimum Teleport 5m, the baseline's only 5 points.  Even HEAVY advantages won't make it very expensive and it's basically unresistable.  

 

(The more I think about it, the less I like TK for this, as it really doesn't make sense that a higher-STR person can resist the power better.  So I'm taking a deeper look at Teleportation.)

 

Like I said, though, if going the Teleport Usable As Attack (UAA) route, you need a "reasonably common and obvious set of defenses that cancel out the attack."  (6E1:355)  Making that defense a successful DEX roll by the target (technically, the target's owner, since she's actually targeting the focus) seems a reasonable defense, hardly unresistable.  Heck, for most characters that defense would work more than 50% of the time.  (Anybody the power is being used against probably has a DEX roll of at least 12-, and almost certainly no less than 11-.)

 

Agreed, however, that the base Teleportation, being practically nothing, makes this an unfairly cheap power.  Setting a minimum level of, say, 10m and adding a -0 Limitation that the object ends up at the person's feet could work.

 

Cost concerns aside, maybe combining Teleport UAA with Multiple Attack, but with just AoE Accurate instead of Accurate Selective for fairness sake...

 

How about this as an example:  Teleportation 10m, Usable as Attack at Range (Defense is DEX roll to hold onto targeted object; +1 3/4), AoE (2m radius Accurate; +3/4), 0 END (+1/2); Only vs. accessible objects (-1/2), Objects end up at target's feet / falling in place (-0).  50 AP, 33 RP.  I'd probably also go with Rapid Attack; Ranged Multiple Attacks Only (-1) so she can use it in a half Phase.

 

(The Only vs. Accessible Objects means that she can't use it to, say, cause the target himself to end up lying on the ground.)

 

In practice, let's say Lucky Lass has OCV 8, and hits Soldier Sam with this power, trying to target some or all of his foci.  Because of the AoE Accurate, the foci are each at DCV 3 (regardless of size).  However, Multiple Attack adds -2 to her OCV for each object beyond one. So to target just his four grenades, she's at -6 OCV, giving her a 2 OCV vs. the grenades' 3 DCV, or 10- for each shot, and her first miss means she automatically misses any subsequent ones.  (She'd probably want a few levels with this power.)  And Sam still gets to make a DEX roll to try and grab each of the falling grenades that she does hit with the power, so even if she hits all four, on average he probably ends up with two grenades in his hands and two on the floor.  This doesn't feel overly abusive to me, but I welcome opinions to the contrary.

 

Alternately, there's Teleportation 10m, Usable as Attack at Range (Defense is DEX roll to hold onto targeted object; +1 3/4), AoE (2m radius Accurate; +3/4), Autofire (5 shots; +1 1/2), 0 END (+1); Only vs. accessible objects (-1/2), Objects end up at target's feet / falling in place (-0).  60 AP, 40 RP. 

 

So Lucky Lass with her OCV 8 vs. the OAFs' DCVs of 3 means that her to-hit is 16- with the number of objects potentially teleported dependent on how good she rolls.  On average, she hits 3-4 times.  And again, Sam still gets to make his DEX rolls.  Effectively the same end result, but a bit cleaner as she only has to make one to-hit roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was starting a response on TK UAA< and how I would likely allow a penalty to the DEX roll so success would be about as common as a typical NND defense, but...

 

What about Change Environment to force a DEX roll to hold on to foci?  You get to set the penalty to the DEX roll.  Maybe some of the penalty is "only for accesible foci".  Maybe he gets a roll for each focus, so he may hold on to some and lose others.  It's his quick reactions that allow him to recover from the unlucky event causing his foci to slip. 

 

Maybe you have to use Autofire or Multiple Attack to target more than one Focus in a single use, but maintaining the field would cause different foci to be targeted phase after phase.

 

I think that could be a better model for the effect you are trying to achieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the maintain the field to target multiple foci.  

 

But just a quick thought for the moment...popping fasteners and the like is the classic D&D Knock spell.  Hmmm...maybe Fantasy Hero has a writeup of something similar?

 

Brekkers and coffee required before serious cogitation can commence.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I was starting a response on TK UAA< and how I would likely allow a penalty to the DEX roll so success would be about as common as a typical NND defense, but...

 

What about Change Environment to force a DEX roll to hold on to foci?  You get to set the penalty to the DEX roll.  Maybe some of the penalty is "only for accesible foci".  Maybe he gets a roll for each focus, so he may hold on to some and lose others.  It's his quick reactions that allow him to recover from the unlucky event causing his foci to slip. 

 

Maybe you have to use Autofire or Multiple Attack to target more than one Focus in a single use, but maintaining the field would cause different foci to be targeted phase after phase.

 

I think that could be a better model for the effect you are trying to achieve.

 

Ooo!  I like this idea a lot!  I'd definitely do a roll for each focus.  An Autofire CE sounds like it might be the best way to go.  Many thanks!

 

31 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

I like the maintain the field to target multiple foci.  

 

But just a quick thought for the moment...popping fasteners and the like is the classic D&D Knock spell.  Hmmm...maybe Fantasy Hero has a writeup of something similar?

 

Brekkers and coffee required before serious cogitation can commence.....

 

Interesting thought.  The 6E Grimoire has a "Charm of Release" which is basically just Lockpicking 20-.  So I don't think that would really work for what I'm talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly in the 6th ED Martial Arts book there is a power removes an opponents armor. One of the examples is cutting off an opponents armor by targeting the straps with a sword. 

In that book it was built as a drain vs the armor with each roll causing some of it to fall off (lowering its DEF) and once all of it is drained then all the armor has fallen off. 

I guess that could be adapted here but instead of attacking the foci, you drain the BODY of the material holding the Foci to the Targets person. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BoloOfEarth said:

So Lucky Lass with her OCV 8 vs. the OAFs' DCVs of 3 means that her to-hit is 16- with the number of objects potentially teleported dependent on how good she rolls.  On average, she hits 3-4 times.  And again, Sam still gets to make his DEX rolls.  Effectively the same end result, but a bit cleaner as she only has to make one to-hit roll.

I think if anything this is a bit easy for the target to hold on to multiple objects. I would probably give Dex rolls, with -1 to Dex for each object after the second (or more if you have multiple hands / arms). This happens in a moment, so grabbing 4 or 5 falling objects nearly simultaneously would be quite a feat. If you got to say 8 or 10, it is supremely unlikely for someone short of Spiderman. There are some side cases where I would allow complimentary rolls (maybe Fast Draw, maybe Juggling or Sleight of Hand) for people who are skilled with the items being disarmed.

 

Overall, either build seems pretty okay to me.

 

- E

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I built two separate powers (she has a VPP):

 

Slippery/Sweaty Hands:  Change Environment (-4 to DEX Rolls to hold onto current accessible focus), AoE (2m Radius Accurate; +½), Uncontrolled (stops when target takes a Phase to wipe hands off; +½), Half END (+¼).  AP = 27, END = 1.

 

Weak Buckles / Clips:  Change Environment (-4 to DEX Rolls to catch falling OAFs), AoE (2m Radius Accurate; +½), Autofire (5shots; +1½), 0 END (+1).  AP = 48, END = 0.

 

With the first, she can target the individual and lasts for however many Phases she put END into it. 

 

With the second, she targets his foci.  I'd say that she'd need to re-attack for it to affect different foci in future Phases.

 

Thanks again, all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 9:58 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

What about Change Environment to force a DEX roll to hold on to foci?  You get to set the penalty to the DEX roll.  Maybe some of the penalty is "only for accesible foci".  Maybe he gets a roll for each focus, so he may hold on to some and lose others.  It's his quick reactions that allow him to recover from the unlucky event causing his foci to slip. 

 

Maybe you have to use Autofire or Multiple Attack to target more than one Focus in a single use, but maintaining the field would cause different foci to be targeted phase after phase.

I believe this makes good sense for Foci that are held/wielded, but not so much for those that are holstered, attached with molles, or strapped to the target a la a belt or somesuch (like, say, grenades).  Key to this is that one shouldn't have to make a DEX roll to hang onto something that's already tethered to him/her.  I realize that one might argue that untethering such things could be part of the special effect, but to that I would argue back that there's a reason targeting  foci has a penalty and that it costs more for TK to have fine manipulation … and that I do not feel it should be free to just wave both of those types of things away claiming 'special effect' …. as that's a LOT of benefit … for no cost, at all.

Thus, I think that for your (solid) idea to be justifiable, a limitation would be required that the power doesn't work on tethered/unwielded/worn foci … only on those that are 'in hand' (so-to-speak).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Surrealone said:


Thus, I think that for your (solid) idea to be justifiable, a limitation would be required that the power doesn't work on tethered/unwielded/worn foci … only on those that are 'in hand' (so-to-speak).

To me anything that fits that category would be IIF or OIF. If it is in a sheath, the belt can still be unbuckled or cut or break, etc if they are OAF or IAF. That is part of the discount they get for making it an accessible foci, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, eepjr24 said:

To me anything that fits that category would be IIF or OIF. If it is in a sheath, the belt can still be unbuckled or cut or break, etc if they are OAF or IAF. That is part of the discount they get for making it an accessible foci, IMO.

A full-sized pistol is an OAF, agreed?  (Because it is obvious and quite accessible...)

 

Now, put that pistol into a retention holster (which has a strap with snap button, or Velcro … to retain the holster while running, climbing, hanging upside down, etc.) and now what do you have?  That's right, the pistol is still an OAF … it's just a holstered OAF … on which the aforementioned CE shouldn't force a DEX roll.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×