6E Speedster Question: Running or Flight?

[PamelaIsley]

I'm curious why in the 6E Champions book (and the 6E volume 1), there are two different ways to build a speedster's super running power.  I know Hero has many ways to build the same or similar powers, but this one is confusing to me for some reason.

 

The most common way (used on Kinetik in Champions and suggested repeatably throughout both books) is to use the Flight Power, with the limitation "only in contact with a surface." 

 

However, you can also just use Running, which is a power.

 

What is the main functional difference between the two powers?  Is there a type of super speed that is better simulated by just the Running power?

 

I'm actually just interested in tacking super speed on to a Brick (Superman/Supergirl type) character that I'm trying to build, if that makes any difference.

[Grailknight]

It's the simplest way of doing common speedster tricks like running up the side of buildings or across a body of water. With Flight as opposed to Running you don't fall or sink.

[PamelaIsley]

Makes sense.

 

That's the thing I just wasn't thinking of.

[Greywind]

Also as Flight, it has a higher turn mode.

[DreadDomain]

Another option is to link Clinging with Running (only while Running, doesn't help against KB, works on liquid). It becomes more or less an adder to Running and preserve the turn mode advantage.

 

Depending on campaign, I suppose works on liquids could be anywhere between +1/2 and +1.

[Duke Bushido]

5 hours ago, Greywind said:

Also as Flight, it has a higher turn mode.

 

 

As others have pointed out, it has the disadvantages of Flight: turn mode, double knock back, etc.  One thing I just want to point out because I see people forget about this a lot at the worst possible time:  If you stop moving, you're not Flying.  So if you are "flying in contact with a surface" across a body of water and something stops you, you're either swimming or sinking.

 

Just so you know.

 

 

 

Duke

 

[Ninja-Bear]

Dread Domain can you cling to water?

 

Pamelaisley you can also buy the advantage use movement as alternate move (sp?). I buy that for my Speedsters-Running Usuable as “Gliding” cause I know that it is a lesser form of Flight.

[Ninja-Bear]

Funny thing is that I was thinking about this Flight for Running for Basic builds. Can you imagine the confusion of new players. 

 

Player: Ok I want to be a really fast Speedster. How much Running?

 

Gm: Ok, how fast?

 

Player: Fast enough to run across water and up buildings.

 

GM: Ok you want flight.

 

Player: Huh? But I run really fast!

[Greywind]

2 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

As others have pointed out, it has the disadvantages of Flight: turn mode, double knock back, etc.  One thing I just want to point out because I see people forget about this a lot at the worst possible time:  If you stop moving, you're not Flying.  So if you are "flying in contact with a surface" across a body of water and something stops you, you're either swimming or sinking.

 

Just so you know.

 

 

 

Duke

 

 

Same applies if you're running.

[Doc Democracy]

the biggest confusion will come when they "run" with their Flight 15" and get beaten by the guy with Running 17" who is not "so fast he can run up walls"

[Killer Shrike]

It's in the family of "clever" power builds arrived at by reasoning from effect...what mechanic matches the effect of generating enough momentum to defy gravity such that you can run up a wall / across water / etc?

 

Flight allows moving while defying gravity, so limiting Flight to require contact with a surface accomplished the desired effect. It caught on.

 

There's a certain cachet people give to absurdities like this that cause them to survive, meme like, even when there is a more logical way to accomplish the desired outcome or when systemic correction could be made to remove the absurdity. 

 

For instance, later editions could have just added an advantage or adder to Running to allow it to be upgraded to have that behavior. Or  to just unify all movement powers as a single base power called "Movement" with various modifiers to dial in the desired behavior for a given type of movement. Running, Flying, Gliding, Swinging, Leaping, Teleport, Swimming...just increments of movement with various pros and cons attached. 

 

 

[Ninja-Bear]

KS I thought too that they could’ve made a adder for that effect.

 

Or I wonder what threshold of Running would be needed (with NCM) should be bought and declared that you are moving fast enough to run on water. Like if you have enough leaping then Falling penalties don’t apply.

[Killer Shrike]

For an average human with average sized feet and mass distribution to run on water, it would take a forward speed of around 108 kilometers per hour, give or take, the last time I looked into it. 30 meters per second.

 

I don't recall seeing any numbers on running up a wall, but in terms of thrust necessary to defy gravity that would be very similar to a rocket taking off or a plane flying straight up, minus the difference in friction of the surface you are running up vs the friction of air resistance, so it should be determinable.

___

Edit: this is the general thrust equation NASA supposedly uses (or used at one point) https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/thrsteq.html 

 

And here is a variant for self contained rockets: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/rockth.html 

___

Edit edit: 

 

Actually, depending on the material of the wall, running up a wall requires less overall thrust than pushing a rocket up as the friction of the surface being run up helps act against gravity because "friction force is parallel to the surfaces interacting with a magnitude that is proportional to the force with which these two surfaces are pushed together". 

 

So, while the force necessary to move a mass can be calculated in abstract terms, if you want to get technical you'd have to account for the friction coefficients between different wall surfaces and shoe soles.  

___

 

However, in an elastic science campaign (such as supers), it kind of doesn't matter. It's just a thing some characters can do and others can't. If you aren't going to break down the science of how a sonic screamers powers work (answer: they don't really in any practical way...the amount of energy necessary to weaponize sound is far greater than the amount of energy produced by the sonics themselves) or how a person with concussive blast powers doesn't pulverize themselves when they use their powers, or how a growth character doesn't fall prey to the square cube law, or any of the other ludicrous things one must be willing to overlook when doing 4 color superheroes, then there's no reason to get technical about running on water.

 

Also, the game mechanics aren't defined according to physics, they are defined as flat units of game distance regardless of mass, etc. 

 

So, yeah, "don't worry about it" would be my advice. As going up takes twice as many hexes / units of movement in the HS, if you bought enough movement to run on water and doubled it you should be covered for running up a wall unless the GM studied physics and is determined to get obstreperous.

[CptPatriot]

14 hours ago, PamelaIsley said:

I'm curious why in the 6E Champions book (and the 6E volume 1), there are two different ways to build a speedster's super running power.  I know Hero has many ways to build the same or similar powers, but this one is confusing to me for some reason.

 

The most common way (used on Kinetik in Champions and suggested repeatably throughout both books) is to use the Flight Power, with the limitation "only in contact with a surface." 

 

However, you can also just use Running, which is a power.

 

What is the main functional difference between the two powers?  Is there a type of super speed that is better simulated by just the Running power?

 

I'm actually just interested in tacking super speed on to a Brick (Superman/Supergirl type) character that I'm trying to build, if that makes any difference.

 

I would have bought it as Running with the Usable as Flight advantage. This way you use it as needed to run over water and up the side of a building. 

[Ninja-Bear]

56 minutes ago, cptpatriot said:

 

I would have bought it as Running with the Usable as Flight advantage. This way you use it as needed to run over water and up the side of a building. 

Curious do you then put on the must touch surface limitation or just assume it’s there? That’s why I said gliding cause I’m assuming the flight must still touch surface.

[Ninja-Bear]

6 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

As others have pointed out, it has the disadvantages of Flight: turn mode, double knock back, etc.  One thing I just want to point out because I see people forget about this a lot at the worst possible time:  If you stop moving, you're not Flying.  So if you are "flying in contact with a surface" across a body of water and something stops you, you're either swimming or sinking.

 

Just so you know.

 

 

 

Duke

 

Aside note here.  Check with your group. We don’t really enforce the turn mode so it’s a moot point.

[CptPatriot]

Just now, Ninja-Bear said:

Curious do you then put on the must touch surface limitation or just assume it’s there? That’s why I said gliding cause I’m assuming the flight must still touch surface.

 

Yeah, you could place Must Touch Surface on the advantage to enforce how you must move with it. 

[Ninja-Bear]

I know you could cptpatriot but do you use it?

[PamelaIsley]

10 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Funny thing is that I was thinking about this Flight for Running for Basic builds. Can you imagine the confusion of new players. 

 

Player: Ok I want to be a really fast Speedster. How much Running?

 

Gm: Ok, how fast?

 

Player: Fast enough to run across water and up buildings.

 

GM: Ok you want flight.

 

Player: Huh? But I run really fast!

To be honest, this is a problem with a lot of Hero.

 

P1: "I want to be immune to a certain type of attack."

 

GM: "Ok, buy Desolidification."

 

P2: "Well, I want to use Mind Control to make people into my slaves."

 

GM: "Ok, buy Transform."

 

 

[Killer Shrike]

5 hours ago, PamelaIsley said:

To be honest, this is a problem with a lot of Hero.

 

P1: "I want to be immune to a certain type of attack."

 

GM: "Ok, buy Desolidification."

 

P2: "Well, I want to use Mind Control to make people into my slaves."

 

GM: "Ok, buy Transform."

 

Yes, this type of thing is what I was referring to in my first post. Looked at as a timeline, workarounds emerged to apply mechanics to a problem when the power / ability that putatively should address a concept (per its name and purpose) either doesn't or is too cumbersome / expensive to be practical. The flexibility of the system to permit this is generally seen as a feature, and it is at the macro level. But it also reveals flaws at the micro level that could have been addressed as the rules went through multiple editions and revisions.

 

One of the central themes is that the system does not like absolutes, wanting to charge points for varying levels of effect. To be absolutely immune to an infinite amount of damage, for instance, would logically want to charge an infinite amount of points. But if an attack misses / can't hit you, then you are effectively immune to that attack regardless of how much damage it is doing. If an attack passes right through you then you aren't technically hit and therefore being Desolid indirectly becomes an absolute immunity to attacks that cannot affect Desolid. You don't want any of the other things that Desolid grants (its core functionality, actually), so you apply limits to take away all of that (the comical Desolid; "Not Really Desolid" Limitation) leaving only the "can't hurt me cuz you can't hit me" facet. Aren't we clever? Then players start doing things like tacking on "Affects Desolid" to their fire blasts and eye lazers and guns, and suddenly Kitty Pride and ghosts and what not that actually use Desolid "legitimately" for its intended purpose are sad.

 

Mind Control is cool and all but classically players don't like losing agency, and few players are willing to cooperate with losing control over their character. They want to be able to break out of the control in an act of heroic will and they want to do so before their character is made to do something damaging to their concept of the character. So, Mind Control is gimped a bit to allow people to get out of it. It's also a bit of a paperwork nightmare when used for long term control, tracking levels of effect and breakout roll increments, etc. There are tricks you can do to make Mind Control stick hard, but Transform can effect permanent (or at least long term) changes in characters right out of the box; that's it's intended purpose. So, mind controlling people into servitude without hassles like them getting uppity and breaking out of the control...Transform seems like a good way to go. Switching it around via modifiers to behave like a mental power can address any squeamishness, if one goes to the effort, and can get costly, but in the end it is a viable mechanic to apply to the desired effect.

 

In both cases, applying an unexpected mechanic to arrive at a desired effect complies with one of the precepts of the system to "reason from effects" and utilizes another precept of "separation of mechanics and sfx" to wallpaper over the jerryrigging. At the time when ideas like that were formulated, they were arguably "clever" ways to use the building blocks of the system to arrive at a desired end result. However, the flaws or quirks of the system as it was that led people to these convolutions could have been addressed in later versions. In this case, an attempt at immunity was added in the form of Damage Negation, and it does provide some utility but it missed the target and is no better at modeling absolute immunity than the scalar defenses we already had. 

___

A thing I find it useful to remember when using the Hero System is that the intent of the points is to ensure that characters are roughly equivalent in capabilities. Some power builds that color outside the lines still land in reasonable places from a perspective of points cost to effect, and if they don't cause unintended side effects via odd rules interactions, then they are relatively harmless once you get past the labeling incongruity. I'll use or allow those, typically. 

 

At the end of the day, a GM controls what is and is not allowed in their campaigns and how much tolerance they have for wacky workarounds vs applying custom modifiers to base powers to make them work like their name indicates they should vs make custom abilities from scratch vs just saying "No".

___

Probably the worst offender in the category of "clever" solutions that subvert the intent of the game in my opinion, for a while there was a tendency for any sufficiently woolly "how to ?" build question to eventually include discussion of just using Extra Dimensional Movement to go to a parallel dimension where whatever you wanted to be true after your character used the power is true. It was the main ingredient in the manufacture of many vats of handwavium.

 

I still gnash my teeth at the thought of it, many years later. ?

[PamelaIsley]

Hero's version of Mind Control is hopelessly broken. If I were a supervillain, I wouldn't spend a single point on it (it's arguable how suitable long-term mind control is for a PC).  But that's another thread.

 

You are absolutely right, though, that at some point they should have rewritten things to make more sense.  If Desolidification can apply immunity to a certain type of damage for a certain cost, just invent a power called Immunity that costs the same thing so the label makes sense to people who aren't hero experts.  Same thing goes for Running/Flying I guess. 

[Killer Shrike]

18 minutes ago, PamelaIsley said:

Hero's version of Mind Control is hopelessly broken. If I were a supervillain, I wouldn't spend a single point on it (it's arguable how suitable long-term mind control is for a PC).  But that's another thread.

 

I wouldn't call it "hopelessly broken" personally, it has some utility, and it could be fixed. Another thread couldn't hurt to perhaps get people to chime in with their thoughts.

 

Quote

You are absolutely right, though, that at some point they should have rewritten things to make more sense.  If Desolidification can apply immunity to a certain type of damage for a certain cost, just invent a power called Immunity that costs the same thing so the label makes sense to people who aren't hero experts.  Same thing goes for Running/Flying I guess. 

 

Exactly. How much should that cost? Make a power that does that for that cost.

 

Personally, I sometimes model damage immunity on Damage Reduction. It goes up to 75% in the book in a predictable price structure. Just add one more tier for 100% following the price structure and there you go.

 

Edit: I found this old post from 2003...it will probably get purged soon, but its still there today:

 

This was my post on "Invulnerability" as a custom power, built up from Damage Reduction:

____

 

Here is a custom power Ive kicked around, considering allowing into play:

 

Invulnerability {Yield Symbol}

 

---

Standard Power/Defense Power

Persistent

Self Only

 

Invulnerability provides a character with total immunity to any direct effects of a specific Tight Special Effect, whether that effect would be beneficial or not. This includes any of the characters own powers which are not Self Only or Sensory in nature; thus Instant powers such as Aid and Healing cannot be used on oneself unless specifically limited to Self Only if they are of a SFX covered by the Invulnerability.

 

A Tight SFX is any SFX that approximately 10 to 15% of opponents might be expected to possess within the confines of a particular setting. More or less expansive SFX can be selected for an Invulnerability but require the application of a modifier called Scope (see below).

 

Immunity to direct effect in this context means that any Power or outcome of a specific Special Effect has absolutely no effect upon the character whatsoever, regardless of circumstance. In the case of Attack Powers this means that no damage or dice of effect are applied to an Invulnerable character if the SFX of the attack is covered by the SFX of the Invulnerability. For all other Powers which have some effect not determined by dice of effect, that effect fails to affect an Invulnerable character if the SFX of the attack is covered by the SFX of the Invulnerability. Attacks that cause damage as an incidental or situational effect may still affect an Invulnerable character. For example Change Environment typically will affect an Invulnerable character with the exception of any direct damage even if the SFX of the Invulnerability applies to the SFX of the Change Environment. Similarly, using Powers to affect the environment around an Invulnerable character may have an effect depending on the circumstances involved and the Scope of the Invulnerability.

 

Example: HEROGuy is Invulnerable to Mental Powers (90 Real Cost in most supers campaigns). The villain Simon Sez tries to use his 12d6 Mind Control (SFX: Psychic) on HEROGuy, automatically failing because HEROGuy is Invulnerable to the SFX of his attack. HEROGuy laughs off the weak attempt at penetrating his thick skull, but thinking fast Simon Sez uses his Mind Control to command a passing driver to swerve off the road and careen into HEROGuy from behind! The fender of the Lexus leaves a painful dent in his thigh as HEROGuy Rolls with the Punch. Maybe he should have invested in some armored tights!

 

Example: OmegaMAN is Invulnerable to Energy Powers (150 Real Cost in most supers campaigns). OmegaMAN has tracked down the vigilante Drastic Measures, trapping him in a parking garage. Drastic whirls around and tries to use his 4d6 RKA (SFX: Anti-Matter Ray) on OmegaMAN, doing no damage because OmegaMAN is Invulnerable to the SFX of his attack. Sadly, OmegaMAN isn't as quick on his feet as Drastic Measures, and before he can react Drastic targets the ceiling of the garage level over his head, bringing quite a lot of cement and a couple of cars down on his head despite an ungainly attempt to jump clear. Drastic shrugs and thinks to himself, "Well, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few dopey would be heroes' heads", as he gets back to his personal war on crime.

 

This Power can also be circumvented by the use of Variable Special Effects in some circumstances if the SFX that the Invulnerability protects against is narrow enough. Thus a Mutant with a Variable SFX (Any Energy) Energy Blast could get around an Invulnerability vs Fire or any other Tight SFX by switching between SFX until he found one that worked, but could not circumvent an Invulnerability with a broader SFX that applied to his attack such as Invulnerability vs Mutant Powers or Invulnerability vs Energy.

 

Example: Arkelos the Wizard targets a Fire Dragon which has Invulnerability to Fire with his Mystic Bolt of Mutilation with Variable SFX (Fire, Ice, Electric, Acid). If Arkelos choose the Fire SFX the Dragon will take absolutely no damage from the spell, but the other SFX will affect the Dragon normally. However, if Arkelos used the same spell against a Celestial Dragon with Invulnerability to Magic (a +1 1/2 Advantage in most Fantasy campaigns) the spell will not work regardless of whether Arkelos chooses Acid, Fire, Electric, or Cold because the Spell also has SFX: Magic. Arkelos might want to consider diplomacy!

 

This Power can be taken many times, applying to a different SFX with each purchase.

 

This Power is inappropriate in many campaigns, particularly Invulnerabilities to broad categories of Special Effects, and should be approved by the GM prior to use. Dramatic and common sence should be considered in the taking of Invulnerabilites. A character that is totally Invulnerable to any reasonable threat can place a significant strain upon the GM's ability to challenge that character, and such a character could outshine other PC's if allowed to run amok.

 

In any case where the broadness of a Special Effect is in doubt, the GM has final authority (as always).

 

 

---

Scope: The broadness of the SFX defined will effect the usefulness of the power; broader SFX categories will cost more points than narrower to reflect thier general usefulness. A reasonably tight single SFX should represent a SFX that approximately 10-15% of the potential opposition might possess within the campaign as whole. Thus, SFX: Heat/Fire, SFX: Radiation, SFX: Magnetism are all tight single SFX in most supers campaigns but SFX: Mental or SFX: Mutant Powers are usually not as they cover a broader range of powers/abilites unless mutants or mental powers are abnormally scarce in that particular campaign. Similarly Invulnerability to "My Brothers Mutant Powers" is extremely specific and should be commensurately less expensive.

 

The Scope modifier may be either an Advantage or a Limitation depending upon its application. Scope is rated in terms of broadness and specificity. Thus to represent an Invulnerability which applies to a broader or more narrow SFX than normal use the following chart:

 

 

Scope	Modifier
Vs. a Specific Individual or a 5% subset of a Tight SFX	-1 3/4
Vs. a Small Group (immediate family, fellow test subjects, a 25% subset of a Tight SFX)	-1 1/4
Vs. a Medium Group (extended family, common subrace, uncommon race, a 50% subset of a Tight SFX)	-3/4
Vs. a Large Group (very common subrace, common race, a 75% subset of a Tight SFX)	-1/4
Tight SFX (approximately 10-15% prevalent)	+/-0
broad SFX (appoximately 25% prevalent)	+1/2
Very Broad SFX (appoximately 50% prevalent)	+1
Extremely Broad SFX (appoximately 75% prevalent)	+1 1/2
Encompassingly Broad SFX (appoximately 100% prevalent)	+2

 

The total modifiers are added to garner the value of the Scope Modifier. Thus an Extremely Broad SFX (+2) that applied only to a Small Group (- 1 1/4) would be a +3/4 Advantage.

 

Example: Destructo is only immune to his brother Opticon's Mutant Powers (-1 3/4), in a campaign where approximate 25% of all opponents are Mutants (+1/2). Thus the Scope modifer for Destructo's Invulnerability is (-1 1/4), or 60 / 2.25 = 27 points. If Opticon had a tighter SFX for some or all of his powers such as "Lasers" then Destructo could buy his Invulnerability only vs Opticon's Laser Powers, which would equate to a Scope modifier of (-1 3/4) 22 points. If Opticon has powers that do not have the Laser SFX, they will affect Destructo normally but his Laser powers will not affect Destructo directly at all. However, any indirect effects would apply as normal. If Opticon uses his Lazer to cause a treebranch or similar overhang to drop on Destructo from above, or to cut a crater into the ground beneath Destructo's feet, Destructo's Invulnerability will not protect him from any damage or inconvenience incurred from those circumstances.

 

Allowing a character to buy Invulnerability to thier nemesi's powers can be game altering and should be carefully considered or disallowed outright, but in some cases common and or dramatic sense may dictate that this is not only allowable but adds an interesting twist to a plot line. In any case, this is not a tactic which should be encouraged or over used lest it lose its impact.

 

Some common Invulnerabilities would include:

 

 

Invulnerable to "Physical" attacks is a 100% relevant Encompassingly Broad SFX (+2) in almost all settings and thus costs 180 points.

 

Invulnerable to "Energy" attacks ranges from Very to Encompassingly Broad, but in most supers and fantasy campaigns will be Extremely Broad and thus cost 150 points.

 

Invulnerable to "Slashing/Piercing" attacks is 25% in most modern settings, 50% in most supers settings, and 75% in most fantasy or gun heavy settings and thus costs 90/120/150 points accordingly.

 

Invulnerable to Blunt/Impact attacks (including Knockback/down and falling damage) is generally 75% relevant in most campaigns, but this may be only 50% relevant in many fantasy or gun heavy campaigns and thus is either 120 or 150 points accordingly

 

Invulnerable to all Mental Powers will vary from campaign to campaign, but in many supers campaigns will generally be 25% relevant and thus cost 90 points. Invulnerability to all Ego Blasts however would work out to a Tight SFX, Small Group (about 25% of all Menatalist probably have an EGO Attack, and random powers bought as an EGO Attack round out the difference) in most campaigns for 27 points (as a comparison, a character with 27 points of Mental Defense and a 10 EGO would resist 29 points of damage from EGO Blasts (5d6 of effect max, or 8d6 average) for 27 points, and also resist all other Mental Powers).

 

 

Invulnerable to all Mutant Powers will vary from campaign to campaign, but in many supers campaigns will generally be 25% relevant and thus cost 90 points. Invulnerability to all Mutant Fire Powers however would work out to Broad SFX, Small Group for a (-3/4) which would be 34 points

 

Invulnerable to all Superhuman Powers will vary from campaign to campaign, but in most supers campaigns will generally be 75% relevant and thus cost 150 points. In some common source campaigns, this might be a 100% relevant SFX but probably also qualifies for one of the Specific limitations as well indicating a Invulnerability that would not work vs the Superhuman Powers with a different origin. The definition of a "Superhuman Power" would be any Power excluding other constructs bought as a Power such as Characteristics or Skills which is natural to a character and not conceptually externalized from the character such as through a universal Focus, some instances of Only in HERO Id or Restrainable, and not native to a characters race. This would cover most altered humans, mutants, and some "Power Ring" type characters (with non-universal FOCI) but not cover most gadgeteers, sentient robots, power armor users, martial artists, or some aliens (aliens such as Ironclad which have abilities not typical of thier race would be affected).

 

Invulnerable to all Martial Arts attacks should generally be bought as Invulnerable to "Physical" only vs Martial Arts which in most campaigns would qualify as a Small Group for 105 points, but as a Large Group in a NinjaHERO game for 165 points. A lesser form of this Invulnerability would be to buy it as Invulnerable to Blunt/Impact attacks (including Knockback/down and falling damage) which would not protect against bladed weapons used in conjunction with Martial Arts, but would cost only 75 points in a non martial arts specific campaign or 135 in a NinjaHERO Campaign.

 

 

 

---

Hulled: If a character or vehicle's Invulnerability stems from a protective outer skin or outer layer and thier insides do not benefit from the protection of the Invulnerability if attacked directly then that is roughly equivalent to a mild form of Restrainable and is worth a -1/4 Limitation. Any attack, including some Conforming AoEs (such as gas clouds and similar), some Change Environments, and some Indirects which can circumvent the Invulnerable Hull are applied normally, ignoring the Invulnerability. Further, some circumstances may circumvent the Invulnerability for all attacks outright even if they lack appropriate advantages; for example an Invulnerable Hulled Vehicle with an open door would lose the benefit of its Invulnerability to an attack that was able to exploit such an opening, typically with a -2 to hit or with a Called Shot if using Hit Locations. Finally, opponents that have successfully Grabbed an Invulnerable character or vehicle may strike at openings in the Hull with the usual penalties for Grabbing while keeping a hand free if they can reasonably reach those openings. For most characters, as opposed to Vehicles, openings in thier 'Hull' would include thier eyes, nostrils, ears, mouth, and other bodily orifices at the GMs discretion. Characters and vehicles with Hulls also typically take the Visible limitation.

 

---

 

Weakness Some Invulnerable Characters have a specific exclusion clause to thier Invulnerability. For some, it is a literal location on thier body, for others its a specific material, and for still others its more abstracted. It is usually appropriate to also take either a Vulnerability or Susceptibility Disadvantage (or both) for the character revolving around the Weakness to depict a truly serious frailty.

 

Location Weaknesses are a place on the body of a character which is not protected by the Invulnerability; if the Weakness is also defined as accessible then an opponent that knows about the location may take a -2 OCV on attack rolls if not using Hit Locations, or may make a called shot if using Hit Locations to target this area and if successful will completely bypass the characters Invulnerability. Achille's Heel is a classic example of this type of Weakness.

 

Material Weaknesses represent an Invulnerability which does not affect a specific type of material such as alluminum, silver, wood or a specific subtype of that substance; a weapon constructed of that material (even a makeshift weapon) will always circumvent the Invulnerability. Superman's weakness to Kryptonite or the Norse god Baldur's weakness to mistletoe are examples of this type of Weakness.

 

Abstract Weaknesses represent less specific or more conceptual weaknesses. Some possibilities might include a character whose Invulnerability does not work at all during a certain phase of the moon, or is turned off if they see a certain color. GM's discretion should be used heavily for such Weaknesses, and should carefully consider whether in some cases a Physical Limitiation, Accidental Change (to unprotected by Invulnerable and back), a Dependency, or some other Disadvantage might not be more appropriate for the character.

 

 

Weaknesses are represented using a process similar to defining a Focus. A Weakness is defined by how apparant it is, how accessible it is, and what type it is; first determine whether the Weakness is a Material, Location, or Abstract Weakness. and then decide if the Weakness is Obvious or Inobvious, and whether it is Accessible or Inaccessible.

 

Inobvious Inaccessible Weakness (IIW) is a -0 Limitation; it represents a Weakness which is neither apparent nor exploitable in combat and is not limiting enough to be worth any points. Such a Weakness basically serves as a flavorful character hook or as an enabler for a larger concept; for example a character with such a Weakness may take an Infrequent Physical Limitation that occurs if the Weakness is exploited or something similar. An IIW can be exploited if a character is rendered helpless but generally not otherwise.

 

Obvious Inaccessible Weakness (OIW) is worth -1/4; it represents a part of the characters body that is noticably unprotected or vulnerable but which is generally difficult or impossible to target specifically in combat, such as thier eyes perhaps; suprise attacks or attacking the character while they are incapacitated will bypass the Invulnerability. This form of Weakness can be used to represent some characters that must concentrate or be aware of a threat to maintain thier Invulnerability, like Captain Britain and some Martial Artists, but are as vulnerable as anyone else (aside from any other defenses they may have) if incapacitated or caught unawares. in this case an opponent should intuit that an ambush would be an effective tactic against such a character.

 

Inobvious Accessible Weakness (IAW): is worth -1/2; it represents a Weakness which is not obvious or apparent but which can be targeted in combat to circumvent the Invulnerability.

 

 

Obvious Accessible Weakness is worth -1; it represents a weakness which is both clearly identifiable and exploitable in combat. All opponents can immediately discern the Weakness and target it in combat. Such a Weakness is rare, but examples include suit of Invulnerable Armor lacking a helmet or face mask (thus the head would be the Weakness in this case).

 

---

Non-Dispersing: is worth -1/2. Some Invulnerabilities will stop all damage, but dont disperse the impact of the attack. Thus a character with a Non-Dispersing Invulnerability still takes Knockback as normal and will take damage from the Knockback unless thier Invulnerability specifically protects against it (such as Invulnerable to Physical, Invulnerable to Blunt/Impact).

 

---

Affects Desolidified: Though derived from Desolid using the Custom Powers rules, Invulnerability is now a seperate power and is not affected by powers with this Advantage.

 

Area of Effect: Normally this has no bearing on Invulnerability, but Areas of Effect that are bought Conforming do have an effect on Hulled Invulnerability. A Conforming attack treats a Hull as a wall, but may at the GMs discretion seep into any breaches or openings in a Hull circumventing the Invulnerability and having its normal (or a reduced) effect. For a character with a Hulled Invulnerability, this might indicate a poison gas or a fire ball which gets into his respiratory system even though his skin is unharmed.

 

Armor Piercing: AP has no effect vs. a character Invulnerable to the SFX of the AP attack.

 

AVLD: AVLD has no effect vs. a character Invulnerable to the SFX of the AVLD attack. Invulnerable cannot be defined as the targeted Defense of an AVLD attack.

 

BOECV: BOECV has no effect vs. a character Invulnerable to the SFX of the BOECV attack.

 

Inherent: Invulnerability can be bought Inherent.

 

Indirect: Normally Inderect is irrelevant to Invulnerability, but can interact with Hulled Invulnerability. If an Indirect Attack is bought in such a way to circumvent a targets 'outer layer', or which indicate a particularly accurate form of attack which is 'guided' then as circumstances indicate Indirect of this sort will allow the circumvention of Hulled Invulnerability in the correct circumstances. Generally such an Indirect attack should get in at least one shot if circumstances allow before an Invulnerable character or the pilot of an Invulnerable vehicle can take steps to close or ward any breaches in thier Hull, but at the GMs discretion a suitable Indirect attack may continue to exploit this weakness by taking an appropriate penalty to thier attack roll ranging upwards from -2 OCV even if the Invulnerable character is attempting to protect the gaps in thier Hull.

 

NND: NND has no effect vs. a character Invulnerable to the SFX of the NND attack. Invulnerable is not a 'Normal Defense' and thus is not circumvented by an NND attack if the SFX of the NND Attack is covered by the SFX of the Invulnerability. Invulnerability vs the specific SFX of an NND is not a valid 'exculsion clause' for an NND because Invulnerability already does not take damage from the attack in the first place. However, an NND could name general Invulnerability as part of an exclusion set indicating that a character with any sort of Invulnerability at all is unaffected by the NND even if the SFX of the NND would normally not be stopped by the Invulnerability.

 

Penetrating: Penetrating has no effect vs. a character Invulnerable to the SFX of the Penetrating attack. However, Hulled Invulnerability may not stop Penetrating damage at the GMs discretion; however at worst a Hulled Invulnerability should not suffer more than half the Penetrating damage of such an attack.

 

Personal Immunity: This Advantage may be taken on Invulnerability, although it is a limited use case. This would allow a character to affect themselves with a targeted beneficial effect if the SFX of the Invulnerability would normally prevent it. The primary use for this would be if a character had an Aid or Healing Power not bought Self Only which had a SFX covered by thier own Invulnerability.

 

Usable On Others: This can be applied normally to Invulnerability. However, some duration and/or other means of ending the effect should be defined as normal for a 0 END Constant Power.

 

Variable Advantage: As detailed in the Power Description, this Advantage can sometimes be used to circumvent specific Invulnerabilities.

 

Variable Special Effects: At the GMs discretion, this Advantage may be allowed to represent an Invulnerability which can be 'fine tuned' to work against various SFX of equal Scope. However, this could be extremely powerful and should be considered a STOP sign ability.

 

 

---

 

Ablative: This is not appropriate to Invulnerability; a better way to represent an "Ablative" Invulnerability is using either a Burnout Activation or Charges.

 

Activation: Activation Rolls are appropriate to Invulnerability, particularly with either the Jammed or Burnout rules. Burnout particularly could be used to model an "Ablative" coating.

 

Charges: In general, since Invulnerable is already a 0 END Constant power, Charges are inefficient. However, they can be taken with Invulnerable if desired, and is another method that can be used to represent an 'Ablative' coating or even a '9 Lives' effect. However, the Fuel option should not be allowed, or at least treated as a STOP sign power. Boostable Charges have no relevance to Invulnerability.

 

Nonpersistant: This can be taken with Invulnerability, and can also be combined in many fashions with Concentration, Costs Endurance only to Activate, Increased Endurance, and/or Extra Time to represent a kind of Invulnerability that takes some effort to 'turn on', and when combined with Visible may indicate some kind of Armor Skin or a metamorphosis into some more durable form.

 

FOCI: Foci work normally with Invulnerability unless the Weakness modifier is also taken on Invulnerability. A GM should carely examine an Invulnerability with both FOCI and Weakness to ensure that they are 2 seperate issues and not a 'double dip'. Typically a Focus will benefit from whatever Invulnerabilities it grants. Thus an Amulet of Fire Prevention which grants Invulnerability to Fire would itself be immune to fire damage. This is open to GM's interpretation however, particularly in the case of Fragile FOCI.

 

Gradual Effect: This is not appropriate for Invulnerability.

 

OIHID: This Limitation is appropriate to Invulnerable, but see Visible below and Nonpersistent above.

 

Restrainable: This is not normally appropriate to Invulnerability; see Weakness instead.

 

Visible: Much like Visible Armor, Visible Invulnerability takes the form of some outward indication that the target is particularly resistant to harm. The visual appearance should give a very strong clue of the appropriate types of damage the Invulnerable character is resistant to. Thus someone with a Visible Invulnerability to fire may have red skin and constantly flaming hair as a SFX. Someone with a Visible Invulnerable to Mental may have an effect apparent to anybody with Mental Awareness such as a specific aura or a constant mental static surrounding them. The net effect is anyone possessing a power of the SFX that the Invulnerable character is protected from should be able to 'guess' thier Invulnerability by making an Intelligence check, PER Roll, Power Skill check, or even automatically as the GM decides before deciding to attack them and even if they fail such a roll, it should be made clear to them after attacking that the Invulnerable character is completely unharmed by thier attack.

 

 

---

Invulnerability Cost: 60 points for Invulnerability to a single tightly defined Special Effect approximately 15% prevelant to the game setting.

 

 

 

 

[DreadDomain]

16 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Dread Domain can you cling to water?

Not as written but this is why I was suggesting Works on liquids as an advantage. From an effect perspective (ignoring gravity) Clinging is an adequate starting point.

 

I dislike when Running is built Flight or Teleport and feel that Super-Running is so common that it should be built with, you know, Running.

 

My simple solution is two adders to Running; Clings to Surface 5 points and Works on Liquids 5 points.

[Ninja-Bear]

Just a thought Dread. Since TK has Affects Porous, how about have that tacked in Clinging? It’s 10 pts. though.

[Doc Democracy]

20 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

For instance, later editions could have just added an advantage or adder to Running to allow it to be upgraded to have that behavior.

 

There is another reason 10” Flight, only touching surface (cost break) might out compete 10” Running, may cross water & run up walls (cost booster). ?