Summon question

[quozaxx]

I only have 5th edition and not all the books.  

 

According to 5th,  if a character summons something,  it appears right next to them in the largest space available. 

 

But I want it to appear 30m away so it's not obvious which individual is summoning the creatures.

 

So. Would Ranged work or Indirect or would I need both?  

[Hugh Neilson]

I would say that Range would allow it to arrive further away, but it will still be obvious who summoned it.  Making that less obvious would require IPE.

[quozaxx]

Okay.   Let's say that the bad guy wants a summon power,  but he doesn't want anyone know he's the one doing it. 

 

But the power comes from an OAF.  Does IPE still exists?

[IndianaJoe3]

2 hours ago, quozaxx said:

Okay.   Let's say that the bad guy wants a summon power,  but he doesn't want anyone know he's the one doing it. 

 

But the power comes from an OAF.  Does IPE still exists?

 

Obvious Focus is Obvious. If he doesn't want that, it needs to be Inobvious.

[Hugh Neilson]

Yup - "obvious" and "no one knows he's doing it" are pretty  much opposites.

[quozaxx]

Can you conceal an Obvious focus?  

[Spence]

42 minutes ago, quozaxx said:

Can you conceal an Obvious focus?  

 

The concept is that if the Focus is Obvious than when the power/effect is triggered it will be obvious who is using it and when it is used by.  

 

The text doesn't change between 5th and 6th editions.

"If a Focus is Obvious, it’s clear to anyone looking at the character that the power comes from the Focus — no PER Roll is necessary. This is important, because opponents know where the power comes from and can attempt to disable the Focus or take it away."

Hero System 6th Edition page 292 and Hero System 6th Edition Vol 1 page 376.

 

Bottom line, if the focus is Obvious you cannot hide who is using it. 

If you want no one to be able to tell you need to go with Inobvious.

 

[archer]

2 hours ago, quozaxx said:

Can you conceal an Obvious focus?  

 

You can conceal it beneath your raincoat while you aren't using it. But while you're using it, anyone who see it known the power is coming from it because you have to take it out of concealment to use it.

 

Now with Indirect it gets trickier.

 

If you are behind a wall, for example, and the power has Indirect:

 

1) Anyone on your side of the wall sees the power and knows the power comes from the Obvious focus.

2) Anyone on the other side of the wall sees the power coming through the wall but can't see the source of the power whether it is Obvious or not (unless that person sees through walls).

 

As for the interaction between an "Obvious focus" and "Invisible Power Effect", I'm not sure that's been comprehensively addressed in the rules.

 

For my personal opinion, an Obvious focus has to be obvious. The power might be invisible as it travels from the focus to the target but the user of the focus is going to have to do something to make it obvious that the darned thing is a focus: holding it over his head, waving it at the target, or something similar. It shouldn't take a brilliant mind to connect the dots and realize that what's happening to the target has something to do with the focus which is being waved around. (You might get around the obviousness of your particular focus by giving a dozen people fake copies of the focus and having them all wave at the target at the same time that you do but that doesn't seem to be a practical solution most of the time.)

 

Now if you do all three Indirect, Obvious focus, and Invisible Power Effect, you could get around the obvious drawback by always standing behind opaque objects or inside of Darkness fields before using the focus. But outside that scenario, the obvious focus is going to be obvious when you use it.

 

edit: come to think of it, maybe you could only fight blind people....

[Hugh Neilson]

The simple answer is that a focus which can be concealed fairly easily, thus hiding the fact that the power comes from the focus, is not Obvious.  An Inobvious focus providing a power without  IPE would  not be the Obvious source of the power, but the character using it would be the Obvious source of the power.  He could try to use Stealth to go unnoticed, but the penalties for using a Visible power make that a pretty tough Stealth roll.

[quozaxx]

I like the indirect idea and IPE "may" obscure the path from the focus to the summoning character 

 

But it looks like I'll have to go inobvious if I want to follow the rules. 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

Just now, quozaxx said:

I like the indirect idea and IPE "may" obscure the path from the focus to the summoning character 

 

But it looks like I'll have to go inobvious if I want to follow the rules. 

Teeeechnically, an Obvious focus makes it obvious that the focus is the source of the power.  But that says nothing about who's using the focus!  An application of IPE to conceal the user could be considered valid, so long as the SFX adequately explains it. 

[IndianaJoe3]

26 minutes ago, quozaxx said:

I like the indirect idea and IPE "may" obscure the path from the focus to the summoning character 

 

But it looks like I'll have to go inobvious if I want to follow the rules. 

 

Going to an Inobvious Focus will definitely result in a cleaner build.

[Spence]

10 hours ago, archer said:

If you are behind a wall, for example, and the power has Indirect:

 

1) Anyone on your side of the wall sees the power and knows the power comes from the Obvious focus.

2) Anyone on the other side of the wall sees the power coming through the wall but can't see the source of the power whether it is Obvious or not (unless that person sees through walls).

 

Not really.  Obvious means it is obviously the focus (and the user) where the power originates.  Indirect simply means you do not have to follow a straight/normal path. 

 

Not matter how you wiggle, Obvious means everyone/everything will know where the power originates without a PER roll.

[Tech]

Obviously, common sense has to be used in various situations regarding an OAF.  A handgun or blaster is quite obvious while being used but I have no problem with a character concealing it while it's not in use, such as hiding it in your jacket or pocket. If someone is hiding behind a large boulder and summoning stuff nearby, the special effects dictate whether people will know the location of the summoner. That's just good roleplaying or tactics. However, if said summoner kept doing that, that OAF may have to be changed to IAF.

[quozaxx]

What about changing it to an extra dimensional gate?  Would that be cheating?

[Thumper]

I would think that an Obvious focus that generated an Inobvious power would only Obvious to someone capable of sensing the Inobvious power.  Consider the following scenario involving four people, Allen, Bob, Charles and Dave, standing in a room:

• Allen is wearing a Helm of Telepathy, an OIF that grants Telepathy, and is using his Telepathy to read Bob's mind.
• Bob is the target of Allen's Telepathy attack.
• Charles possess the Mental Awareness enhanced sense.
• Dave is an ordinary human with no enhanced senses.

In such a scenario:

• Bob, as the subject of the attack, would be aware that Allen was attempting to read his mind, and that the power originated from the Helm of Telepathy.
• Charles would be aware that Allen was targeting Bob with a Mental Power, and that the source of the power was the Helm of Telepathy.
• Dave would be unaware that Allen was attacking Bob or that the Helm of Telepathy provided Allen with powers.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

24 minutes ago, quozaxx said:

What about changing it to an extra dimensional gate?  Would that be cheating?

Are you talking about the SFX or the mechanics? 

A Summon with the SFX of "extra-dimensional gate" is just as obvious as any other Summon with the same advantage/limitation set. 

Mechanically, using EDM with Gate to "summon" has the crippling flaw that what comes through from the other side is totally out of your hands.  Maybe it's helpful, maybe it's a crazy monster, maybe it's nothing (or invisible).  You can somewhat wiggle around this with Follower, but why not just have your Follower stick with you? 

 

16 minutes ago, Thumper said:

I would think that an Obvious focus that generated an Inobvious power would only Obvious to someone capable of sensing the Inobvious power.  Consider the following scenario involving four people, Allen, Bob, Charles and Dave, standing in a room:

• Allen is wearing a Helm of Telepathy, an OIF that grants Telepathy, and is using his Telepathy to read Bob's mind.

You're forgetting that an Inobvious Focus must still have a defined method of detection.  In the case of the helmet of telepathy, that method of detection would be Detect Magic or Mental Awareness. 

[archer]

On 8/11/2019 at 9:03 AM, Spence said:

 

 

Not matter how you wiggle, Obvious means everyone/everything will know where the power originates without a PER roll.

 

The "Obvious" in a focus doesn't give other people extraordinary sensory powers: that isn't a wiggle but rather a fact.

 

If Jethro the World Dominator has an OAF Helm of World-Wide Mind Control and activates it in Cleveland, a person in Tibet doesn't know that the Mind Control they're under is originating from an OAF in Cleveland.

 

People have to be in line-of-sight in order to use their sight to see the focus and have to be within hearing distance in order to use their hearing to hear it. The "Obvious" never changes that.

[quozaxx]

1 hour ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

Are you talking about the SFX or the mechanics? 

A Summon with the SFX of "extra-dimensional gate" is just as obvious as any other Summon with the same advantage/limitation set. 

Mechanically, using EDM with Gate to "summon" has the crippling flaw that what comes through from the other side is totally out of your hands.  Maybe it's helpful, maybe it's a crazy monster, maybe it's nothing (or invisible).  You can somewhat wiggle around this with Follower, but why not just have your Follower stick with you? 

 

You're forgetting that an Inobvious Focus must still have a defined method of detection.  In the case of the helmet of telepathy, that method of detection would be Detect Magic or Mental Awareness. 

Actually I don't want the individual in question to have any control what comes out or have any control over them.

 

What pops out would be GM's discretion... and since I'd be GM...

 

Cue evil laugh 

[Spence]

5 hours ago, archer said:

 

The "Obvious" in a focus doesn't give other people extraordinary sensory powers: that isn't a wiggle but rather a fact.

 

If Jethro the World Dominator has an OAF Helm of World-Wide Mind Control and activates it in Cleveland, a person in Tibet doesn't know that the Mind Control they're under is originating from an OAF in Cleveland.

 

People have to be in line-of-sight in order to use their sight to see the focus and have to be within hearing distance in order to use their hearing to hear it. The "Obvious" never changes that.

 

Well now, since you are not actually reading the posts and channeling the absurd I'm out.

 

Have fun.

[Thumper]

6 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

You're forgetting that an Inobvious Focus must still have a defined method of detection.  In the case of the helmet of telepathy, that method of detection would be Detect Magic or Mental Awareness. 

 

The Helm of Telepathy is an Obvious Inaccessible Focus, not an Inobvious Inaccessible Focus, so the rules for Inobvious Focus aren't relevant.  The real question is whether the "Obviousness" of a Focus overrules the "Inobviousness" of a Power generated by that Focus.  That is, does a Mental Power (Inobvious) become Obvious if is generated by a Focus. I don't think the rules support that view.  I certainly can't find anything that supports that view.  Thus we have to assume that an Inobvious power generated by a Obvious Focus remains Inobvious, and that the Focus is only Obvious to those who can sense the power.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

1 hour ago, Spence said:

Well now, since you are not actually reading the posts and channeling the absurd I'm out.

I think it's entirely reasonable to say that being out of sensory range prevents your foci from being sensed.  Moreover,

Quote

If a Focus is Obvious, it’s clear to anyone looking at the character that the power comes from the Focus

Emphasis mine. 

 

That said, if somebody keeps avoiding the Obviousness of their OXF, then it's time to sit them down and tell them it's really an IXF and they need to change their sheet.  A Limitation that isn't etc etc. 

 

Just now, Thumper said:

The Helm of Telepathy is an Obvious Inaccessible Focus, not an Inobvious Inaccessible Focus, so the rules for Inobvious Focus aren't relevant.  The real question is whether the "Obviousness" of a Focus overrules the "Inobviousness" of a Power generated by that Focus.  That is, does a Mental Power (Inobvious) become Obvious if is generated by a Focus. I don't think the rules support that view.  I certainly can't find anything that supports that view.  Thus we have to assume that an Inobvious power generated by a Obvious Focus remains Inobvious, and that the Focus is only Obvious to those who can sense the power.

See above rules quote.  It explicitly does not work that way. 

[Thumper]

4 minutes ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

See above rules quote.  It explicitly does not work that way. 

 

Quote

If a Focus is Obvious, it’s clear to anyone looking at the character that the power comes from the Focus — no PER Roll is necessary

 

I'm not sure you understand what the word "explicit" means, because the quoted statement does not explicitly assert what you are claiming.  You are reading into the quote and inferring your position.  I believe the quoted statement is assuming an Obvious power that anyone can see.  If the character was using an Inobvious Power, then it would only be clear that the power  comes from the Focus to characters who can sense the use of the Inobvious Power.  Characters who cannot sense the Power cannot tell that the power comes from the Focus because they cannot tell a Power has been used at all.  The Obvious Focus limitation does not grant other characters extraordinary senses they don't possess.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

Just now, Thumper said:

You are reading into the quote and inferring your position. 

I believe "no u" is the appropriate reply in this instance. 

[Thumper]

1 minute ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

I believe "no u" is the appropriate reply in this instance. 

Sure, if you're an eight year old, that's a very appropriate response.

The rules do not explicitly state what you are claiming.  That is a fact.

Your interpretation is not the only possible interpretation.  That is also a fact.

If you can't deal with these facts, and can't defend your position without resorting to making up facts ("It explicitly does not work that way."), then there is no point in arguing further.  I continue to find my position reasonable and consistent with the rules, and your position incorrect.  Unless the rules explicitly state otherwise, Inobvious Powers generated by Obvious Foci remain Inobvious and cannot be perceived by characters who lack the appropriate senses, and thus a character cannot determine that a power they cannot see was generated by a Foci.