HERO Lmitations and Value

[Hugh Neilson]

This is, of course, Hero, where we reason from effect.  If the power provides the ability to Detect, then the functionality of Detect should be built in.

 

Can a limitation occasionally provide an advantage?  Sure.  "Only affects" (or "does not affect") women could detect that a woman was disguised as a man or vice versa.

 

But that is very different from "well, my Blast can only work against, or not work against, anything I want, and I can change it on a whim".  That Blast will, at worst, fail to harm someone I want it to harm only once.  Practically, when I am targeting an opponent, why would I choose to limit it at all?  Rather, I have created a detection system.

 

Question Zero is whether I want a specific capability in my game at all, regardless of its price.  There's a passive-aggressive approach to getting rid of such abilities - price it out of reach.  But xp and player creativity make that challenging.  There's also the direct approach - NO. 

 

No, the PCs cannot have an Images power that can be fine tuned so that only those who are truly loyal to the King can see it, or dopplegangers can't see it, or the murderer of the King can't see it, or anyone who tells a lie can't see it for the next five minutes, or it only causes items to shed light if they are magical, and so on and so forth.

 

When you can change who can perceive it at will, it is no longer limited at all, and in fact is stepping on the toes of another power.  If you can use your Images as a variable Detect, then that VPP probabky needs to also hold Detects.  If it's for very creative uses of Images to simulate a wide array of other abilities, then it is a VPP that always has the Images SFX.

 

 

 

 

[ScottishFox]

9 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

At the risk the freely-given down votes, I think a lot of this is brought out by the most "no-filled" edition of the game to date, and built upon with examples and even conversational exchanges that encourage the idea that if an additional expense _can_ be applied, then it _must_ be applied: mechanics over SFX.  Looked at another way, what is the point of taking a minor Limitation -- doesn't work against sweaty opponents-- if I then have to build a complex sensory detection system that's going to cost more than any potential savings?  

 

I couldn't agree more.  This is excessive crunch and complexity being added to a system that already loses players to excessive crunch and complexity.

 

If I build a death ray that only works against Kryptonians I shouldn't have to build a detect Kryptonian device.  I just fire the stupid thing and see if it works or not.

 

It would be like having a lethal ultrasound device that liquifies brains: 1d6 RKA - NND - Does Body - Only against organics with brains  (NND is blocked by a full helmet or force field).

 

Do I now need Detect Organic creatures with brains?  Detect Helmets?  Detect forcefields?

 

Come on!

[Grailknight]

The issue isn't that the power is set up to work "only vs a limited number of targets", it's that the "limited targets" affected can be changed at will and there seems to be no unifying logic or SFX behind what changes can be made.

 

It's fine to have a power that only works vs women right up until the moment that you want to flip that and say it now only works vs men or robots or dragons. At that point you are no longer in the realm of Limitations and you need an advantage like Expanded Class of targets at the least.

 

It's best to work this out before play begins. The player may not even realize the many clever ways this can be abused later in the game. Have the discussion beforehand and avoid a situation that could disrupt a play session and other players.

 

Also 6th Edition rules forbids this sort of construct when dealing with NND's and the way they apply to targets(Although Steve Long broke this rule in one of his very first write-ups. See: Takofanes) stating that no character should have NND's with direct opposite conditions.

 

 

[eepjr24]

1 hour ago, ScottishFox said:

 

I couldn't agree more.  This is excessive crunch and complexity being added to a system that already loses players to excessive crunch and complexity.

Easy enough to solve, don't use what you don't like? Or simply use an earlier edition. Many folks like and use 6e, many folks like and use other versions. There is no reason to use one you don't like as well.

 

Quote

It would be like having a lethal ultrasound device that liquifies brains: 1d6 RKA - NND - Does Body - Only against organics with brains  (NND is blocked by a full helmet or force field).

As Grailknight said, the problem is not the limitations themselves, but the fact that they can be changed at any time and be used to replicate the effects of other powers. Again, when building a power, go back to basics. What does this power do:

 

1) Does damage at range

2) Tunes target types at will based on criteria not perceivable to the character

 

Depending on whether it is area effect or not, it might also be selective.

 

Based on those things, people are generally saying that this power needs a great amount of flexibility, such as that provided by variable limitations with supplemental detects, or an MP or a VPP. Perhaps other constructs such as I laid out in my earlier post can be used as well, at the GM's discretion.

 

- E

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

3 hours ago, ScottishFox said:

If I build a death ray that only works against Kryptonians I shouldn't have to build a detect Kryptonian device.  I just fire the stupid thing and see if it works or not.

Sure, but what's the first thing Lex Luthor would do if he had such a death ray?  I figure he might start hitting people with it to see if they're a Kryptonian.  Because for Lex Luthor, just knowing if somebody is or is not a Kryptonian is valuable information. 

[Duke Bushido]

I can't give credibility to the idea of requiring a detect because you might use a power to determine something about someone, at least not until every bit of STR and every HTH (normal) attack is mandatory bought with "Detect : Glass Jaw" and swords are required to take "detect: thickness of flesh" because it's quite possible to use these attacks to determine these things. 

 

I do not say that the arguments are not reasoned and well-thought; some folks have put some thought into their opinions, but at the end of the day, all powers will ultimately allow a character to "detect" who is or is not affected. 

 

"I zap him with my lightning bolt." 

 

He drops. 

 

I detected that he is  one of those people who can be hurt by lightning. "

 

 

[ScottishFox]

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

Sure, but what's the first thing Lex Luthor would do if he had such a death ray?  I figure he might start hitting people with it to see if they're a Kryptonian.  Because for Lex Luthor, just knowing if somebody is or is not a Kryptonian is valuable information. 

 

You could use this same logic for flamethrowers.

 

It's important for us to know who is and is not fireproof...

[massey]

Right.  Superman doesn't need to buy Detect: Lead, just because his X-Ray vision doesn't penetrate it.  That's even if it would be useful to occasionally detect lead.  That's just a casual side effect of having N-Ray vision and its natural limitations.  Likewise, if I have Flight: only to hover 6 inches off the ground, I don't need to buy a Detect: Altitude.  If you have an EMP blast that only hurts robots, yeah you can blast people and maybe figure out if they're secretly a robot.  So what?  You can do the same thing with a basic RKA if you don't mind getting a little messy.  Every power is going to give you information about the world around you, based on how that world interacts with your powers.  That's perfectly fine, and you don't have to pay for it. 

 

As far as this specific power goes, in this instance it's the ability to change things on the fly to whatever you want that makes this not actually a limitation.  In fact it pretty much makes the power better, letting you exclude people from the effect any time you want.  It doesn't take a lot to see how this could be abused.  For instance, let's say that Captain Wizard is facing a group of enemies.  There are 3 orcs, a troll, and an evil sorcerer.  Captain Wizard knows that sorcerers are generally smart, and will probably have a good Perception roll.  This would allow the sorcerer to defeat his illusion easily, and he would probably warn the orcs and troll that what they were seeing wasn't real.  So he slaps the limitation "not versus sorcerers" on his Images power, and the sorcerer doesn't even know it's happening.  He doesn't know to shout a warning because he didn't successfully overcome the power, he never even knew it was there.  So the orcs and the troll see an army of the dead rising from the ground in front of them, and they turn tail and run.  The sorcerer then wonders where the hell they are going, when they so clearly outnumbered poor Captain Wizard.

 

When you can pick and choose who isn't affected, and it can be anything you want, your power is much better than it used to be.  Need to affect everybody in the room?  Just declare that it doesn't work against time travelers from 1985 and you're probably good.  Need to have someone specific not be affected?  Just say it doesn't work against Bob.  Need to have only one person affected?  Just say it doesn't work against anyone else.  The power is virtually always more useful with this "limitation".

[massey]

17 hours ago, eepjr24 said:

I'd generally agree with this one, as long as the player confines his limits to things he could detect with his senses. I don't see how a power with no other modifiers knows who is color blind or whose great great grandmother had an affair with a lesser noble. But it is a valid question, I'll raise it in the rules forum.

 

- E

 

Let's say that Father O'Reilly is a very pious man.  He has a power called "True Faith".  It's a 4D6 RKA, OAF Crucifix, only versus demons and vampires.  When he uses the power, the crucifix glows with a holy light and vampires explode.

 

However, let's say some bastard kid comes by and eggs Father O'Reilly's house on Halloween.  The kid is dressed up as a vampire, and if Father O'Reilly (who is getting pretty nearsighted in his old age) tries to use the power, it won't work.  The kid isn't a vampire, and isn't going to explode when confronted with a crucifix.  Nobody has to have a Detect.  The power isn't making a decision on who to blast.  Little Timmy isn't in any danger, because the power isn't going to make a Perception roll to see if it can affect him or not.  It just doesn't affect him because he's not a vampire.

[Duke Bushido]

As I said above, everyone is being reasonable with their arguments--

 

so before that changes, I'd like to make a motion that we stop offering examples before someone on either side takes it the wrong way.  

 

We can accept that overall, information is going to come to us in one way or another.  If the PCs are totally stumped and the GM sends in Captain Cluebat with a small hint-- well, the PCs have done _nothing_ for that except to get stumped for far too long.  No Skill Roll; No PER roll; no "spend your earned XP on this particular 'clue magnet' power.

 

If a PC is reading four different news articles and realizes that there is a hidden connection-- perhaps even has enough information to _know_ what the connection is-- again: he doesn't have to pay for that-- well, other than paying attention, of course.  

 

To borrow the Lex Luthor example above-  why would he have to have a detect if he's using a death ray to see who is Kryptonian (sp?) but _not_ need a detect to fire off a pistol to see who is bullet proof?

 

Up till now (so far as I know), none of us have required a "Detect: how is he affected?" build to go along with any power whatsoever.  So far as I know, none of us has ever denied telling a player "he's hit!  It doesn't look like it did any serious damage, but it must have really hurt, because he's staggering a bit and seems to be trying to shake off a dazed head.  He might be Stunned!" because they didn't have the detect---

 

crap!  Now I'm doing it!

 

So let's pull this back to where it started:

 

 

Hugh's VPP suggestion would very much cover what he's trying to do with the ability to select a specific group who can and can't see the image.  Worst case scenario?  Pull "Selective" out of auto fire and make him pay for that.  That seems to have a built-in "only hits who I want it to" already.

 

I'm not the biggest fan of VPP, to be honest.  It's like giving up a specific set of powers to say "I have every power!", which brings up serious balance issues (yes; believe it or not, even _I_ have balance concerns.  They're just not as intense as those the majority seem to have), but I will let the occasional small pool slide when tightly defined and with some respectable limitations on it.  In this case, something limiting it specifically to casting illusions.

 

_HOWEVER_

 

as mentioned above, do _not_ let it become something else.  Specifically, don't let it become IPE (unless, if using the pool, he builds it with IPE).  Upthread, I suggested the idea of "everyone looking at it seems _something_-- a clear suggestion that something is going on-- they just don't see the image itself.  (remember when you turned off a CRT in a dark room?  It was still lit, but it was lit _black_, sort of....   )

 

Now before I realized that he could switch who could and couldn't see the image, I was thinking a +/- 0.  Given that is able to switch it, I still don't think I'd charge more than +1/4  assuming he was _unable_ to make an image that _everyone_ could see.  If he _is_ able to make the image available to anyone with eyes / sight perception of some sort, then perhaps +1/2, or model it along the lines of "Variable Advantage."  In this case, reverse the way it works and call it "Variable Limitation, " which would _reduce_ in value based on just how broad a group he could broadcast to at any given time, etc.  But that can get complicated.

 

And again-- worst case scenario, cram "Selective" on there (which I don't think requires a Detect, either, but does what the original question seemed to be after) and call it a day.

[Hugh Neilson]

Actually, to Select a target, he has to know the target is there, doesn't he?

[Duke Bushido]

Well, yes.  However, I felt it a fairly safe assumption that he wasn't going to set up an image without at least one person to view it.

[mallet]

I think, and correct me if I am wrong, but the select was about who could see it, not that there was anyone there. 

 

I think the issues is Select as an adder gives you the choice to Select who is the specific TARGET of a power.  I do an area of attack blast and I Select who out of the 10 people in range get Targeted. 

That is not the same as changing an Images power so that only certain people see it. Everyone in range automatically gets to see an Image if it is unmodified. Changing the power so that only people with certain traits sees the Image isn't Select. It is an effect on the power itself.

 

If I added Select to an Image and there were 10 people in range when I created the Image, I could Select which out of the 10 people would see the Image.

 

If I added Select and another modifier, say Only the Color Blind. Then when I created an Image with 10 people in the area, I could choose how many of them are Targeted by the Image (lets say 5), and then only those that were Color Blind out of the 5 I Selected would actually see the Image. I have no idea why anyone would want to build a power like that, but that is what you would get with Select and an additional Modifier narrowing down who gets to see the Image by a trait/race/sense, etc... 

 

So the question becomes, do you build the power with Select so you can choose which targets in range can see the Image, but if you build it that way how is the Image Creator going to choose what Targets he wants by traits? If it is something obvious like "Orcs" then no other modifiers or abilities are needed because the user can see who are Orcs in the area and Target them specifically with Select. But if the criteria the user wants to Select his/her targets by is undetectable by a targeting Sense or other means, for example people of a specific blood-line, then how does he/she make the decision who to Target? Deduction skill roll? PS: Genetics roll? If not, then in this build they would need a Detect Power to know who has the correct blood-line, and then once that is know he Targets those people using Select. 

 

That is not a very efficient way to get the effect/power described in the OP. 

 

So Select isn't the way to go in this instance. It would probably have to be an Images Power build that has the variable advantages Advantage on it, allowing the user to change the type of people who can see the Image each time he/she uses it. In this case he/she isn't Selecting Targets, he is modifying the power itself so that only certain types of people can see it. 

 

Maybe something like:

 

Images: Sight, Hearing and Radio Groups Images, Variable Advantage (+1 Advantages; Limited Group of Advantages (Only certain types of people can see Image must be chosen before use); +1 3/4) (55 Active Points) Real Cost: 55

 

And even then, that might not be enough of a Variable Advantage to make it work, but I just picked that as an example.

 

 

 

 

[lensman]

Mallet, scanned your post but do not have time now.

 

The newest construct of HERO Mechanics that just came to me.

 

Buy the Images as IPE. Use Naked Advantage, Personal Immunity, put Usable by Others on the Naked Personal Immunity. Now The Images are seen by granted Immunity and we dodge the whole Limitation/Advantage debate.

 

More later today.

[Hugh Neilson]

On the topic of selective, "only party members" or "not party members" seems very much the "selective" advantage.  The problem is that Selective can only be purchased for powers that affect an area (Darkness being the example).  While Images fills an area, I question whether it "affects" that area, as it can be perceived by those outside it.  But then, so can Darkness.  Selective also means a to hit roll on each target selected, so a further "Accurate" advantage may be required to fix the DCV of each target at 3.

 

I believe the Naked Advantage model would require the +1 advantage that it can be forced on an unwilling target, typically restricted to Usable as Attack.  I think you would want it Usable as Attack anyway, as the target paying the END makes it pretty simple for them to perceive the image should they wish to.  He likely also wants more range than "within reach", and it will not affect targets he does not have line of sight on (for example, invisible targets) without removing that "recipient must remain within LoS" aspect.  He also can only affect one target, 2 for +1/2 and +1/4 for each further doubling.  If he is thinking of using Images to communicate with his three fellow party members while in an arena occupied by a few hundred spectators, that will get pretty expensive.  Maybe he makes the ability Area Effect to affect multiple targets.  That's questionable as it's not normally available for powers that already have a mechanism for how many people are affected, and "usable by nearby" requires all targets be in reach to receive the power, and stay within 4 meters to keep it.  Perhaps one could allow Range (probably LoS Range so he does not take range penalties, or just No Range Modifiers so he can affect targets he cannot perceive) to affect more distant targets, and +1/4 for each doubling of that four meter limit.

 

Regardless, a very expensive construct.  Which, given its flexibility and potential utility, I think it should be.  It may well be unaffordable.

[Duke Bushido]

Mallet:

 

Forgive me for not quoting; I'm on a touch screen and pressed for time. 

 

Yes: the Select option for auto fire does require picking out who gets hit and who doesn't.  Or maybe I'm confusing it with skip over (is that still a thi g in 6e?)

 

At any rate, I am stretching it a bit- not too terribly. Much, I dont think, but instead of selecting from a group one target at a time to be affected, I am proposing it to select a group: colorblind people; blood relatives of the Queen of China, followers of the Buddha as he dwells within Mr. T. ; whoever. 

 

In this usage, the power in no way affects what the player must know about his targets: the player merely decides to use his power in such a way that only the-group-of-the-moment gets a legible copy, as it were. 

 

As mentioned above, if a person has a power of "doesn't work against X, it does not give him foreknowledge about where X might be lying around; he uses it and hopes for the best. 

 

There are multipower builds that feature more or less the same power with different advantages and limitations: we read them as the character setting up the power "such that it does X," and we don't bat an eye. 

 

The problem at the core of the disagreement here is that we are dealing with a limitation that changes, and in spite of the fact that the character is denied "full basic utility" of an unlimited power, a portion of us are seeing this limited power as advantageous "because he can pick and chose who doesn't see it.". We aren't all seeing two important things:

 

He has no way to make it visible to everyone (assuming that the GM accepts the build), 

 

It is _not_ undectable to anyone outside the permitted group:  that takes IPE, after all. IPE _is_ an advantage, and what the player is proposing is a disadvantage.  We are forgetting that the player and the GM should get together at this point and discuss _how_ its limiting; how it is disadvantageous (though, if he can change the excluded group at will, I wouldn't think the limitation should be any greater in value than X2 END and X2 time, since he can effectively define 'only right handed people,' then use it a second time for 'only left handed people', since that's what it takes to give him "full use" of the power. 

 

I offered "selective" half-heartedly as an appeasement for those who see nothing but the "advantage" of this Limitation.  Honestly, I have a feeling that a lot of people are seeing it as "free IPE" versus the "outsiders," and that's not what it is. 

 

I don't deny that it's what the player may be trying to back into (where you here when Christopher and I and others were discussing the periodic "upside" of Disadplications?  Sometimes it happens.  It's the GM's job to see that it does not consistently become something that it wasn't bought to be. 

 

 

And hugh: if I have time tonight; in all honesty, I don't have time to read your post, but I remain quite interested. 

 

 

 

Duke 

[Grailknight]

As stated in the OP, he has 5 Images powers. I make this a 5 slot Multipower with each power having different Limitations and none on the Reserve. Otherwise it a classic Power Pool with the attendant cost of changing powers as a 1/2 phase. 

 

I still lean against allowing it but this would be my minimum ruling for a go ahead. Versatility costs in Hero.

 

 

[Hugh Neilson]

7 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

He has no way to make it visible to everyone (assuming that the GM accepts the build),

 

Sure he does - make it visible to everyone except:

 - Norwegian octogenarian architects wielding magical hammers; or

 - green and purple froglike martians wielding solar-powered cold guns.

 

two disadvantages we wrote on PCs in high school to see what the potential GM might say...

 

I like the odds that everyone can see it.

 

7 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

It is _not_ undectable to anyone outside the permitted group:  that takes IPE, after all. IPE _is_ an advantage, and what the player is proposing is a disadvantage.

 

It is critical that the player understand this.

 

My litmus test when I do not think the limitation is all that problematic is to ask the player to tell me what kinds of in-game problems he envisions this creating.

 

perhaps he is Hunted by a Norwegian octogenarian architect who wields a magical hammer, or looks forward to the extended "invasion of the green and purple froglike martians wielding solar-powered cold guns" story arc

 

Show me that it is limiting enough to justify your proposed point savings.

 

7 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

The problem at the core of the disagreement here is that we are dealing with a limitation that changes, and in spite of the fact that the character is denied "full basic utility" of an unlimited power, a portion of us are seeing this limited power as advantageous "because he can pick and chose who doesn't see it.".

 

Yep.  If he can pick "the enemy spy who is revealing our plans to the other side" as the only person who can't see it, how easily can we root out that spy? 

 

If he can pick "only the other party members", one of the OPs original items, he now has a means to communicate in a manner no one else can intercept. 

 

Wouldn't this be a great power if you were playing bridge?  Broadcast your hand, only visible to your partner. 

 

Let's create the image of a wall that only our enemies can see - we are now effectively invisible.

 

How much of a discount is this worth?  Even if I have to pay for IPE (which is only really needed for two of my four examples above)?

[Duke Bushido]

20 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Yep.  If he can pick "the enemy spy who is revealing our plans to the other side" as the only person who can't see it, how easily can we root out that spy? 

 

If he can pick "only the other party members", one of the OPs original items, he now has a means to communicate in a manner no one else can intercept. 

 

Wouldn't this be a great power if you were playing bridge?  Broadcast your hand, only visible to your partner. 

 

Let's create the image of a wall that only our enemies can see - we are now effectively invisible.

 

How much of a discount is this worth?  Even if I have to pay for IPE (which is only really needed for two of my four examples above)?

 

 

Of all the people to miss the meaning of "Limitation," I really didn't think one of them would be you.

 

Of all the people who miss the idea the the GM enforces Limitations, I didn't think one of them would be you.

 

None of those examples are Limitations.  Therefore, when they are suggested, the GM says something along the lines of "you can't fine it tune it quite that way" or whatever works.

 

As with your great epiphany above, go back to what the terms actually mean, and how they work.  First and foremost, the GM has to approve _any_ limitation, one whatever grounds, most typically being "the player can't justify it" or "I can't handle that mid-game without slowing things up."

 

Now I believe we agree that this conversation assumes the GM has agreed to it.

 

And we have a ba-frakin'-_jillion_ arguments as to why it's incredibly advantageous to not be able to tell the entire city "There's a frickin' missile headed right for us" all at once.  There are numerous assumptions that "hum, nothing stops him from defining his group as the entire damned universe!"

 

Well being unable to tell everyone something of grave urgency is limiting.  And there _is_ something limiting this construct, and that something is the goddnnnd GM and the mandatory conversation during character generation that includes "tell me how this is limiting; not good enough-- let's work something out that feels right."

 

Granted, there's no damned mechanic for it, therefore there is no way to expect someone who wants to play a game to stick to the spirit of it, I suppose, and positively no way for the GM to say "that would run counter to what we agreed on."  None.  None at all.  Hell, there's probably a mechanic that specifically forbids that anymore. 

 

 

Damn.  The boy wants some validation that this might be a Limitation.  Hell, let's do the opposite.  Complaining about how everyone else plays the game is scheduled to come around every six weeks or so; we all know that.  But it's a holiday weekend (for a lot of us).  Let's put that off and see how it might actually _work_ as specified.

 

 

Most of us are aware that there's a hurricane coming.  Why is that relevant?  Because it means I have to bow out.  Between the twice-broken spine and the busted up neck, and the fact that synovial fluid responds to barometric pressure, I am in too damned much pain to play nice.   I will see you fine folks when the storm is over.

 

 

 

 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

27 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

None of those examples are Limitations.  Therefore, when they are suggested, the GM says something along the lines of "you can't fine it tune it quite that way" or whatever works.

On 8/25/2019 at 2:06 PM, lensman said:

The possibilities Being: Only Seen by Ultraviolet vision, Only by those who are color Blind, Only by Orcs, Only by Party members, Only by descendants of X.

Emphasis mine. 

[Hugh Neilson]

5 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Of all the people to miss the meaning of "Limitation," I really didn't think one of them would be you.

 

Of all the people who miss the idea the the GM enforces Limitations, I didn't think one of them would be you.

 

None of those examples are Limitations.  Therefore, when they are suggested, the GM says something along the lines of "you can't fine it tune it quite that way" or whatever works.

 

As with your great epiphany above, go back to what the terms actually mean, and how they work.  First and foremost, the GM has to approve _any_ limitation, one whatever grounds, most typically being "the player can't justify it" or "I can't handle that mid-game without slowing things up."

 

Now I believe we agree that this conversation assumes the GM has agreed to it.

 

And we have a ba-frakin'-_jillion_ arguments as to why it's incredibly advantageous to not be able to tell the entire city "There's a frickin' missile headed right for us" all at once.  There are numerous assumptions that "hum, nothing stops him from defining his group as the entire damned universe!"

 

Read the original post.  The power is described as "player defines who is and is not affected from use to use".  That is not a limitation.  You and I are largely on the same page, except that you assume the player will be OK with the GM telling him "no, you can't define it that way" mid-game.  I am looking for the player to define how this will be limiting in play - HE gets to define the power, and we will set the limitations/mechanical build to meet his vision.

 

Not "he writes down the mechanics and the GM dictates how the power works".  That's how we end up fighting over what the ability can and cannot do in game.Define what it can do, and build the power that does just that.

[Hugh Neilson]

Let’s assume that the power is, effectively, “works on whoever I want, redefined with each usage”, and that such an ability is acceptable in the current game.  How should we cost it?

 

VPP is one possibility.

 

However, “I pick who it affects” sounds like Selective, but retaining the “automatically hits” property of an AoE.

 

A Nonselective AoE removes the “automatically hits” element and is a -1/4 reduction to AoE.  The value of that is somewhere between -1/4 and -1/2.

 

MATH:

Reducing an advantage on 40 points by 1/4 saves 10 points.  A -1/4 limitation would save 8 points, and a -1/2 limitation would save 13 points.

 

A Selective AoE takes a standard AoE, applies the limitation that each target must be hit with normal rolls, and allows you to pick your target, so the selection alone should be a +1/2 increase, rather than +1/4, to an AoE.

 

AoE Accurate costs +1/2 for any one target in a 1 meter radius.  To me, this is only AoE as a holdover from older editions – why can’t we just make Accurate a +1/2 advantage?

 

On that logic, “Pick your targets” should be somewhere between a +1/2 advantage (based on the extrapolated AoE logic) or a +3/4 advantage (based on Selective for +1/4, plus Accurate for +1/2).  I’m inclined to say +3/4, and also require any Selective AoE to take a +1/2 advantage for restoring the “hit DCV 3” ability.

 

As a tradeoff, I would suggest that the normal rules for targeting the AoE apply, but the character need not roll to hit every character to be affected.  WHY?  Well,

 

-          First, I picked the higher of the two costs, so we’ll add a slight further benefit.

-          Second, how hard is it to hit DCV 3?  Not very.  Making that an “absolute effect” does not seem like a huge leap.

-          Third, flowing from the second, we are imposing a lot of die rolling (and slowing down the game) for a miniscule chance of a miss.  Speed up the game instead.

-          Fourth, a +1/2 advantage applied to 40 base points is adding 20 points to the cost of the power.  For that price, he could have left the ordinary to hit rolls and bought 10 – 2 point levels to boost his OCV with that attack.  He would not miss often with that construct either.

 

So if we apply this to the Illusion Spell in 6eV1p238’s sidebar, what do we get?

 

Illusion Spell: Sight and Hearing Group Images, -3 to PER Rolls, Area Of Effect (16m Radius; +¾) (42  Active Points); OAF (Wizard’s Staff; -1), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼), Requires A Magic Roll (-½). Total cost: 14 points.

 

Becomes Illusion Spell: Sight and Hearing Group Images, -3 to PER Rolls, Area Of Effect (16m Radius; Selective +1) (Accurate (+1/2) (60 Active Points); OAF (Wizard’s Staff; -1), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼), Requires A Magic Roll  (-½). Total cost: 20 points.

 

Now, we come to the issue of the player who does not want fully “selective”.  Well, tacking on that Selective which still autohits added 18 AP and 6 RP.  “Must define who can see it” could be a limitation.  Let’s assume we think it is a -1/2 limitation on the Selective element of the power.  That 20 AP should get an extra -1/2 limitation, so 20/3.5 = 6 points (still).  If you think it is worth -1 (I don’t), then those 20 AP should cost 5 points instead of 6 and he saves a whole point.

 

And the Images are still not IPE.  However, look at the discussion of perceptibility of Sense-affecting powers.

 

  The Source, Path, Special Effect, and/or Intensity of Sense-Affecting Powers are usually Invisible (even if the Power also belongs to a perceivable category, such as Attack Powers).  Otherwise, Sense-Affecting Powers would be useless. However, the Target Effect is Obvious, since if it’s not the Power can’t affect the target. (Invisibility is a special case; see 6E1 239.)

 

So it is NOT obvious to anyone that the Wizard is using illusions, or even that he created the illusion.  What is obvious is any gestures, incantations, focus, etc. In the sidebar power, presumably it is obvious the wizard has cast a spell.  It is not obvious that the roaring lion or stone wall which just appeared is an illusion, rather than some other spell effect.

[Hugh Neilson]

On 8/25/2019 at 3:06 PM, lensman said:

Second, A Limitation on DEF, that only works v One opponent per Phase.  Realizing that is scales depending on campaign and the Commonality of circumstance of its use. Assume it is a Duelist in a Heroic Fantasy HERO campaign.

 

Did we ever address this?

 

Who picks the opponent?  I assume the character may change it at will, and must set it.  That would be a Nonpersistent defense, so -1/4.  It's really kind of "Instant", only around long enough for one opponent to attack (I'd give him the defenses again if that opponent attacked more than once before the defender's next phase).  That's -1/2 at a minimum.  I'm using this more to assess a floor than to suggest this is the limitation.

 

How often will the character face more than one attacker in a phase?  That happens a lot in most fantasy games, in my experience.  Sometimes, he will get full benefit from his defenses.  Sometimes he will get half the benefits (two attackers in the same phase).  Sometimes he will get less than half (more than two attackers) or none (he did not set the defense against an attacker, or that attacker missed).  Overall, I think a -1 limitation would be reasonable.

[Surrealone]

On 8/25/2019 at 5:06 PM, lensman said:

HERO is a game of Limitations.

 

I have a MU who wants to put a limitation on Images, which last for a time based on END Reserve.

The Limitation is: Viewable only by X. Where X is re-definable. 

The possibilities Being: Only Seen by Ultraviolet vision, Only by those who are color Blind, Only by Orcs, Only by Party members, Only by descendants of X.

Images are not bought with Invisible Power Effect (IPE) Advantage with the limit, Not IPE v X. And trigger only speaks to the Power activating, not who can see the Images.

 

The argument is that since Images are visible to all, all the time, this is a limitation. Feels like an Advantage to me.

A way t have IPE without paying for it. So it is IPE with a Limit on IPE so that IPE does not apply to a Class, or is it an Advantage on IPE so there is a Class that is excluded?

 

Second, A Limitation on DEF, that only works v One opponent per Phase.  Realizing that is scales depending on campaign and the Commonality of circumstance of its use. Assume it is a Duelist in a Heroic Fantasy HERO campaign.

 

 

Visible only to X where X is redefineable sounds more like he should be starting with Mental Illusions (since his vision of the power doesn't entail an actual image that cameras, people, animals, and X can all see/record) … and then working from there to determine a limitation value for limiting to X (by further limiting the class of mind).