6E Multiple Attack, No Skill Levels?

[dsatow]

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

The "half point" issue creates a further question, as the minimum cost for anything is 1 point (p 13).  However, that's easy to get around - all we need is a single slot with +1 OCV and +1 DCV, or two slots, one with +1 OCV and one with +1 DCV, and we can again have any combination desired.

 

isn't that then just a variable slot of 5 points effectively?  Why buy 30 slots of +1 when the cost is the same for 1 variable slot of +15.

 

Fixed slots use set amount of points from the pool.  So in the case of say 10 PD in a slot, even if you only want to use 5 PD, the slot uses 10 points from the multipower.

Variable slots on the other hand can withdraw as much or as little as desired from the pool.

 

Also if your GM allows you to use this kind of construct, what's wrong with that?  Just understand, if a 1d6 drain to everything +10 adv* (110 points active) would drain each and every slot individually.

 

* I am using +10 adv since hero designer maxes out at +10 on multiple powers affected simultaneous.  In effect its over 20 separate powers being affected at the same time.

 

[Ninja-Bear]

On 12/28/2019 at 1:21 PM, PhilFleischmann said:

IMO, a Flexible Slot is not worth twice the cost of a Fixed Slot - for the actual utility you get.  As a result, I find very few characters, both published and made by players I've played with, have Flexible Slots in their Multipowers.

Although these things I think are really hard to prove, I think that the point cost is lesser of a factor in build examples than you think. I think you see the build the way they are is by comparing Pulsar to Starburst.

 

1) As in Pulsar you see many variations on a main sfx attack.

 

2) I don’t see a lot of people really liking splitting defense power with attack power as in Starburst. They rather have it like Pulsar whereas the defense is separate from the attack multi power though it’s the same sfx

 

3) Fixed Slots are easier in play for both the GM and Player. Do you really want aStarburst  player to keep fiddling with his pool during play to get max effectiveness out of it? 

[Hugh Neilson]

Adding to Ninja Bear's comments, it is not like players need to shave down the points to get to campaign average, or even campaign max, defenses and DCs.  A 15d6 Blast costs 75 points, and 30 PD and ED, 20 of each resistant, costs 76.  That's pretty high for even most Supers games, and takes up only a fraction of available points.  Jack OCV and DCV up to 10 each for another 90 and we've spent 241 points in total.  Let's give him 40 meters of Flight for another 40 points.  Still plenty of points.

 

The Multipower moved from the Starburst example to the Pulsar model rapidly in even 1st Edition (can anyone name 3 other characters whose main attack is in a variable slot multipower?  Even one other character?).  On occasion, we see a "choose your movement power" multipower as well, but the Swiss Army Attack Multipower is its main use.

 

As the game has evolved to DC and defense caps, another issue has become more pronounced.  Let's assume our hero above drops his Blast to 10d6 (25 points back), his defenses to 15/15 (all resistant; 40 points back), and his flight to 15 meters (another 25 points back).  Now he has 90 points, so he buys a Multipower with, say, a 60 point pool.  he wants to take variable slots of +10d6 Blast (10 points), +50 meters Flight (10 points), +40 PD (8 points) and +40 ED (8 points), and fixed slots of +5 PD/+5 ED, Resistant (1 point) and 10 meters Flight with MegaScale (+2) (3 points), which costs a total of 90 points. 

 

He expects he will usually allocate 25 points to Blast, 15 to rPD/ED, and 10 each to PD and ED, bringing him back to 15d6 and 30/30 defenses (but only 15 meters of flight).

 

How fast will the GM freak out?  He can have a 20d6 Blast (at 20 PD and ED, 15 resistant), or 42 PD/42 ED, or 55 PD/25 ED, or 25 PD/55 ED (each with 20 rDEF), or 50 PD/50 ED (15 resistant) or 60 PD/40 ED or 40 PD/60 ED (15 resistant).  At 15/15 Defenses, he can Blast for 12d6 and fly 60 meters, or he can fly 55 meters at 20/20 rPD/rED and blast for 10d6.

 

The GM is likely fine if the character can reach campaign max in each ability, but isn't likely to allow hurtling past campaign maxima in any one area.  Meanwhile, the player is not enamored of being able to hit campaign max in some abilities, when he could have just bought campaign max in all abilities, so he goes back to the old build, and ignores Variable Slot Multipowers like Starburst's.  When characters only had 200 points to work with, they could not have, say, a 12d6 Blast, 25 rPD and rED force field and 25" of Flight - that's 80% of his points.  Practically, characters were not buying unlimited 12d6 Blasts, 25 resistant defenses and 25" flight, all wit no limitations when they had to be built for 200 points.

 

Now we add the VPP.  Make it Cosmic, and let's buy our hero the same 10d6 Blast, 15/15 rDEF and 15 meters Flight.  He can spend 90 points on a 36 point pool + 54 control cost VPP.  He can have 20/20 r defenses and a 14d6 Blast.  Or he can have Megascale Flight, or bump his normal flight up, or do an infinite number of other things.

 

A 60 point Cosmic VPP costs 150 points.  That's a Swiss Army Attack Multipower with 15 slots.  But if the VPP is "attacks only" (-3/4), and a Limited SFX (-1/4), now the control cost is halved, so 105 points - less than 8 fixed slots.

 

That 60 point cosmic VPP,  compared to a Starburst Multipower?  150 points means 60 point MP with up to 450 points in total possible slots.  The VPP is vastly more flexible.

 

For every character, there comes a point where the VPP is more efficient than just tacking on slots.

 

De-linking the pool and the maximum AP makes some constructs work much better than before.  Hawkeye or Green Arrow, who could pull anything out of their quiver?  40 point pool, 60 AP control cost (30) Cosmic (so 90), OIF Bow and arrows (too quick for you to Grab in combat; -1/2), attacks only (-3/4) = another 40 points and, for 80 points, Clint Queen can pull out any arrow he can dream up within 60 AP. 

 

Tinker with it a bit more and we have an Adam West-Brand Utility Belt ("Lucky I packed the Bat-Shark Repellent, Robin!")

 

More and more, the Multipower has become a niche framework, largely held in check only because the need to reassign points every phase is intimidating (but it is also intimidating for a flex slot multipower).

[Hugh Neilson]

On 12/28/2019 at 12:53 PM, dsatow said:

 

isn't that then just a variable slot of 5 points effectively?  Why buy 30 slots of +1 when the cost is the same for 1 variable slot of +15.

 

Fixed slots use set amount of points from the pool.  So in the case of say 10 PD in a slot, even if you only want to use 5 PD, the slot uses 10 points from the multipower.

Variable slots on the other hand can withdraw as much or as little as desired from the pool.

 

If you want +60 PD, Variable, it costs 12 points for that slot.  6 Fixed Slots of +10 PD each costs 6 points.

[dsatow]

8 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

If you want +60 PD, Variable, it costs 12 points for that slot.  6 Fixed Slots of +10 PD each costs 6 points.

 

To be honest, thinking about it overnight, to get the granularity and make your multipower efficient, you want to convert at least one of the 6 fixed slots to a variable.  So 5 fixed +10 PD slots, 1 variable +10 PD slot.  7 points, infinite variability.

 

[Hugh Neilson]

I'm not sue I see huge value in the extra variabiliy, but for 1 point, it doesn't need a lot of value either.

[dsatow]

11 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I'm not sue I see huge value in the extra variabiliy, but for 1 point, it doesn't need a lot of value either.

 

Well say you have a 60 point multipower and a 6 DC attack with a total of +3/4 advantage.  That would end up 52 active.  You will not be able to use a 10 active point fixed slot in that situation if that power is used. 

 

Another minor issue is if the multipower has a common limitation of unified power limitation on it.  Then, a 3d6 drain on one multipower slot would affect all slots individually.  A 10 point active slot would disappear.  A 60 point variable slot would just go down to 50.

[Ninja-Bear]

3 hours ago, dsatow said:

 

Well say you have a 60 point multipower and a 6 DC attack with a total of +3/4 advantage.  That would end up 52 active.  You will not be able to use a 10 active point fixed slot in that situation if that power is used. 

 

Another minor issue is if the multipower has a common limitation of unified power limitation on it.  Then, a 3d6 drain on one multipower slot would affect all slots individually.  A 10 point active slot would disappear.  A 60 point variable slot would just go down to 50.

Isn’t how it works already?

[Hugh Neilson]

Yes - dsatow is just pointing out the difference between a 60 point Variable slot of (say) +60 PD (cost 12 points), 6 fixed slots of +10 PD each (cost 6 points) and 5 fixed and one variable slot of +10 PD (cost 7 points).

 

Of course, I could also build that Variable slot with +12 PD for the same 2 point slot cost, and buy the fixed slots in +15 PD increments for 1 point each (IIRC, up to .5 rounds down - maybe I need to go +14).  selecting the appropriate amounts would need to consider how the other slots tie in.

 

I am atill thinking "no, you want increments of the same ability, that is one variable slot, not multiple fixed slots" is the best answer, although the discussion remains interesting.

 

 

[dsatow]

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Yes - dsatow is just pointing out the difference between a 60 point Variable slot of (say) +60 PD (cost 12 points), 6 fixed slots of +10 PD each (cost 6 points) and 5 fixed and one variable slot of +10 PD (cost 7 points).

 

Of course, I could also build that Variable slot with +12 PD for the same 2 point slot cost, and buy the fixed slots in +15 PD increments for 1 point each (IIRC, up to .5 rounds down - maybe I need to go +14).  selecting the appropriate amounts would need to consider how the other slots tie in.

 

I am still thinking "no, you want increments of the same ability, that is one variable slot, not multiple fixed slots" is the best answer, although the discussion remains interesting.

 

Yes, you are correct, at least to me, on all counts.

 

[PhilFleischmann]

On 12/30/2019 at 5:51 AM, Ninja-Bear said:

Although these things I think are really hard to prove, I think that the point cost is lesser of a factor in build examples than you think. I think you see the build the way they are is by comparing Pulsar to Starburst.

 

1) As in Pulsar you see many variations on a main sfx attack.

 

2) I don’t see a lot of people really liking splitting defense power with attack power as in Starburst. They rather have it like Pulsar whereas the defense is separate from the attack multi power though it’s the same sfx

That's my point.  Nobody makes Starburst-style MPs because they're just not cost effective compared to Pulsar-style MPs.  To constructs that cost the same ought to have the same overall utility.

 

For 90 points, you could have a 60-point Multipower, with five fixed slots (6+6+6+6+6).

Or you could have a 45-point Multipower, with five variable slots (9+9+9+9+9).

You sacrifice 15 active points in all those powers, for the ability to mix-and-match.  I don't think that's a fair trade-off.  The variable one is much weaker.

 

For 84 points, you could have a 70-point Multipower, with two fixed slots (7+7).

Or you could have a 60-point Multipower, with two variable slots (12+12).

I guess that's a bit closer.  So I guess variable slots are for having only a few of.  The more variable slots you have in your MP, the less cost effective it is.

 

Combined with the rule that you can't add slots to each other, it makes them even less effective, and further discourages their use.

 

And Hugh's example includes PD/ED variable slots along with rPD/rED variable slots - which according to the rule he sited earlier in this thread, can't be added to each other.

[dsatow]

3 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

That's my point.  Nobody makes Starburst-style MPs because they're just not cost effective compared to Pulsar-style MPs.  To constructs that cost the same ought to have the same overall utility.

 

I think the reason many people don't use them is because you are usually still limited to the number of dice in an attack.  if you had say a 90 point multipower in a 60 active game but the slots were limited to about 60 active for an attack, you probably wouldn't invest in anything more than 30 active in defense.  But then again, if the GM allows you to make that slot up to 90 active, you might be tempted to give up the defense if you could get a shot of at 18d6 without dying.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

2 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

And Hugh's example includes PD/ED variable slots along with rPD/rED variable slots - which according to the rule he sited earlier in this thread, can't be added to each other.

Unless you have rPD and rED outside the MP. 

 

I completely agree with you that Variable slots are generally not worth it.  I can't think of any application where I'd need full flexibility instead of just a couple intermediate slots, to say nothing of summing small slots. 

[PhilFleischmann]

5 minutes ago, dsatow said:

 

I think the reason many people don't use them is because you are usually still limited to the number of dice in an attack.  if you had say a 90 point multipower in a 60 active game but the slots were limited to about 60 active for an attack, you probably wouldn't invest in anything more than 30 active in defense.  But then again, if the GM allows you to make that slot up to 90 active, you might be tempted to give up the defense if you could get a shot of at 18d6 without dying.

People don't use them even for non-attack powers.

 

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

Unless you have rPD and rED outside the MP. 

 

I completely agree with you that Variable slots are generally not worth it.  I can't think of any application where I'd need full flexibility instead of just a couple intermediate slots, to say nothing of summing small slots. 

Well then why can't you use OCV & DCV in slots to add to your OCV & DCV outside of the MP?

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

1 minute ago, PhilFleischmann said:

Well then why can't you use OCV & DCV in slots to add to your OCV & DCV outside of the MP?

Per

Quote

A character may have two Power Frameworks, or two slots in the same Framework, that both add to or affect the same ability bought outside any Power Framework (or the same Combat or Martial Maneuver, or the like). For example, a character could have a Multipower slot of +10 PD, and a Variable Power Pool slot of +15 PD, that both added to his PD, since his PD is not in any Power Framework and the two powers are not adding to each other.  (FRED p310, 6e1 p399)

you can in 6e where you have OCV and DCV outside any Power Frameworks.  I've never argued you can't. 

 

 

[PhilFleischmann]

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

Per

you can in 6e where you have OCV and DCV outside any Power Frameworks.  I've never argued you can't. 

That's good to know.  You didn't argue that, but Hugh did.

[dsatow]

2 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

People don't use them even for non-attack powers.

 

That strange, I use them specifically in 6e for defense.  Here's an example of a 6e defense multipower

 

Multipower (30)

6v Resistent Protection 20PD

6v Resistent Protection 20ED

6v Resistent Protection 20Mental Defense

6v Resistent Protection 20Power Defense

6v +6 DCV

6v +30 REC

[Hugh Neilson]

7 hours ago, dsatow said:

 

I think the reason many people don't use them is because you are usually still limited to the number of dice in an attack.  if you had say a 90 point multipower in a 60 active game but the slots were limited to about 60 active for an attack, you probably wouldn't invest in anything more than 30 active in defense.  But then again, if the GM allows you to make that slot up to 90 active, you might be tempted to give up the defense if you could get a shot of at 18d6 without dying.

 

Yup.  If a character could shift from "average campaign attack and defense" to "much higher attack (or defense) at the cost of well below campaign defense (or attack)", then there would be some tactics to  motivate those variable slots.  But if all you can do is have a campaign average attack or defense when the other is reduced below campaign norms, what's the point?  You get to be less powerful at all times in one or both aspects.

[PhilFleischmann]

4 hours ago, dsatow said:

 

That strange, I use them specifically in 6e for defense.  Here's an example of a 6e defense multipower

 

Multipower (30)

6v Resistent Protection 20PD

6v Resistent Protection 20ED

6v Resistent Protection 20Mental Defense

6v Resistent Protection 20Power Defense

6v +6 DCV

6v +30 REC

Good to know.  I don't see much of that in published characters, however.  But if you don't mind, let me take a further look at your defense multipower.  It costs a total of 66 points.  For that, you could have bought 20 rPD, 20 rED, and +6 REC all the time, at the same time.  But you lose the flexibility.  You could also have:

 

Multipower (40)

4f Resistant Protection 26 PD

4f Resistant Protection 26 ED

4f Resistant Protection 26 Mental Defense

4f Resistant Protection 26 Power Defense

4f +8 DCV

4f +40 REC

 

64 points.  2 points less, for 1/3 more power, but less flexibility.  Or you could have:

 

Multipower (40)

3f Resistant Protection 20 PD

3f Resistant Protection 20 ED

3f Resistant Protection 20 Mental Defense

3f Resistant Protection 20 Power Defense

3f +6 DCV

3f +30 REC

1f 10 PD

1f 10 ED

1f 10 Mental Defense

1f 10 Power Defense

1f +2 DCV

1f +10 REC

1f 10 points of Life Support

1f 10 points of Barrier

 

For the same 66 points.  A good amount of flexibility, with more power than the original MP.  I'll take it one step further:

 

Multipower (40)

2f Resistant Protection 13 PD

2f Resistant Protection 13 ED

2f Resistant Protection 13 Mental Defense

2f Resistant Protection 13 Power Defense

2f +4 DCV

2f +20 REC

1f Resistant Protection 6 PD*

1f Resistant Protection 6 ED*

1f Resistant Protection 6 Mental Defense*

1f Resistant Protection 6 Power Defense*

1f +2 DCV

1f +10 REC

1f +1 rPD, +1 rED, +1 Resistant Mental Defense, +1 Resistant Power Defense, +1 PD, +1 ED, +1 Mental Defense, +1 Power Defense

1f +1 DCV, +5 REC

 

* and you can add 1 more point of non-resistant defense into each of these slots,if you like.

 

For the same 66 points.  You can have the same maximum of 20 rDEF in any of the four categories, or +6 DCV, or +30 REC, and you can mix-and-match with a high degree of flexibility - and with some extra power thrown in.  In the original, you could have +10 rPD and +3 DCV at the same time.  In this version, for the same price, you can have +13 rPD and +4 DCV at the same time.  Or +13 rPD, +3 DCV, and +5 REC.  etc.

[Hugh Neilson]

10 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

That's my point.  Nobody makes Starburst-style MPs because they're just not cost effective compared to Pulsar-style MPs.  To constructs that cost the same ought to have the same overall utility.

 

For 90 points, you could have a 60-point Multipower, with five fixed slots (6+6+6+6+6).

Or you could have a 45-point Multipower, with five variable slots (9+9+9+9+9).

You sacrifice 15 active points in all those powers, for the ability to mix-and-match.  I don't think that's a fair trade-off.  The variable one is much weaker.

 

For 84 points, you could have a 70-point Multipower, with two fixed slots (7+7).

Or you could have a 60-point Multipower, with two variable slots (12+12).

I guess that's a bit closer.  So I guess variable slots are for having only a few of.  The more variable slots you have in your MP, the less cost effective it is.

 

What if your choice was to have either:

 

 - a 12d6 Blast (60 points) and +20 rPD/+20rED and 60 meters of flight, for 180 points, which would make you pretty much campaign standard attack and defenses

 

OR

 

 - An 8d6 Blast, +10 rPD/+10 rED and no Flight (70 points) plus a 70 point Multipower with three variable slots, one for +14d6 Blast, one for +22 rPD/+22rED and one for 66 meters of Flight?

 

You can designate +4d6 Blast (20), +10rPD/10rED (30) and have 20 meters of flight.  Or you can have a 22d6 Blast, but you can't fly and your defenses are considerably lower than campaign standard.  Or you can have a 10d6 Blast (a bit lower than campaign standard) and +30 rPD/rED, well above the campaign standard, with no flight?  Or you can have +32 rPD/+32 rED, and Dodge (or just huddle down and take a recovery)?

 

What if you went all out, and has a 120 point MP with three variable slots, a 20d6 Blast, +40 rPD/+40rED and 80 meters of flight?  You can put 60 points in for a 12d6 Blast and 60 for +20rPD/+20rED most of the time, but when you need to move fast, you can sacrifice offense or defense to make it happen, if you turtle up you can have much higher defenses but no attack or flight, or you can land, drop your defenses to 6rPD/6rED and fire off a 20d6 Blast.

 

Those seem pretty effective to me.  The problem is that the GM won't care how low your defenses are, you aren't getting a 20d6 attack, and no way can you have +40/+40 resistant defenses even if it means you can't attack.  The problem is not costing, but that few games will allow you to make real use of a Starburst type multipower, and you can afford campaign max DCs and defenses (which really means "campaign standard" as pretty much everyone will buy the max) without the savings of a multipower.

[PhilFleischmann]

24 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

What if your choice was to have either:

 

 - a 12d6 Blast (60 points) and +20 rPD/+20rED and 60 meters of flight, for 180 points, which would make you pretty much campaign standard attack and defenses

 

OR

 

 - An 8d6 Blast, +10 rPD/+10 rED and no Flight (70 points) plus a 70 point Multipower with three variable slots, one for +14d6 Blast, one for +22 rPD/+22rED and one for 66 meters of Flight?

 

...

Irrelevant.  I'm not talking about comparing separately purchased powers with a multipower.  And I'm also not talking about campaign standards.  I'm talking about the cost effectiveness of variable slots in a multipower, as compared to fixed slots in a multipower.  See my previous post showing variations on dsatow's defensive multipower.

 

Or we can look at your multipower and come up with similar variants.  Yours is 70+14+13+13 = 110 points (with a little bit of rounding).  You could have made it slightly simpler and let the rPD/rED go up to 23, and the Flight up to 70 m.  So that would be 112 points (70+14+14+14).  For those same 112 points, we could have a MP with fixed slots:

 

70 MP

4f +8d6 Blast

3f +6d6 Blast

3f +20 rPD

3f +20 rED

1f +3 rPD/+3 rED

10v +50 m Flight

and 18 m of Flight outside the Multipower.

 

If the GM won't let you have a 22d6 Blast, you can drop one of the first two slots and save 3 or 4 points, assuming the GM will let you have a 16d6 Blast, or at least a 14d6 Blast.  Or you can reduce the outside-the-MP Blast and save even more points.

 

Or we can break it down further:

 

70 MP

4f +8d6 Blast

2f +4d6 Blast

1f +2d6 Blast

3f +10 rPD/+10 rED

2f +10 rPD/+3 rED

2f +3 rPD/+10 rED

4f +40 m Flight

2f +20 m Flight

1f +10 m Flight

and 10 m of Flight outside the Multipower.

 

Now we've got the potential of 10 m MORE of Flight, and we've saved 11 points!  We could spend those 11 points on +2 rPD, +2 rED, and an extra 1d6 outside the MP.  or we could buy 11 more points worth of slots, like:

 

1f 10 Mental Defense

1f 10 Power Defense

6f Armor Piercing and Area Affect for the base Blast

3f 30 points of Life Support

 

Regardless of the campaign limits, the extra flexibility of variable slots are not worth the extra cost over the price of fixed slots.  Therefore, I maintain that variable slots should cost less than they currently do by the RAW.  My ballpark estimate is that they should cost 50% more than fixed slots, rather than 100% more, as they do now.

[dsatow]

4 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

Multipower (40)

3f Resistant Protection 20 PD

3f Resistant Protection 20 ED

3f Resistant Protection 20 Mental Defense

3f Resistant Protection 20 Power Defense

3f +6 DCV

3f +30 REC

1f 10 PD

1f 10 ED

1f 10 Mental Defense

1f 10 Power Defense

1f +2 DCV

1f +10 REC

1f 10 points of Life Support

1f 10 points of Barrier

 

Yes, you could, but I generally avoid needlessly long multipowers because many GM have a general disdain for reading them at cons which sadly is mostly where I play and not GM.

 

Also, it is against the rules as written to put special powers in a framework.  This includes Mental Defense and Power Defense, which is why I use the Resistant Protection construct.  As usual, a GM may waive this restriction.

 

2 hours ago, PhilFleischmann said:

70 MP

4f +8d6 Blast

3f +6d6 Blast

3f +20 rPD

3f +20 rED

1f +3 rPD/+3 rED

10v +50 m Flight

and 18 m of Flight outside the Multipower.

 

If the GM won't let you have a 22d6 Blast, you can drop one of the first two slots and save 3 or 4 points, assuming the GM will let you have a 16d6 Blast, or at least a 14d6 Blast.  Or you can reduce the outside-the-MP Blast and save even more points.

 

Or we can break it down further:

 

70 MP

4f +8d6 Blast

2f +4d6 Blast

1f +2d6 Blast

3f +10 rPD/+10 rED

2f +10 rPD/+3 rED

2f +3 rPD/+10 rED

4f +40 m Flight

2f +20 m Flight

1f +10 m Flight

and 10 m of Flight outside the Multipower.

 

Now we've got the potential of 10 m MORE of Flight, and we've saved 11 points!  We could spend those 11 points on +2 rPD, +2 rED, and an extra 1d6 outside the MP.  or we could buy 11 more points worth of slots, like:

 

1f 10 Mental Defense

1f 10 Power Defense

6f Armor Piercing and Area Affect for the base Blast

3f 30 points of Life Support

 

 

Characters can have as many Power Frameworks as they want and can afford to buy. However, a slot in a Power Framework cannot add to or modify a slot in the same or another Power Framework, or the same or another Power Framework as a whole.  (6e1p398) So, you need to buy A blast outside the multipower to add to that blast. 

 

You also are not allowed to buy to slots which add to each other.  I believe this also means that the +8d6, +4d6, +2d6 aren't allowed to stack with each other on the outside power.  They must be separate powers.  So you might be able to get away with an 8d6 blast outside the multipower and add one of those slots to the 8d6 blast outside, but using two slots to add damage to the 8d6 blast outside I believe would be illegal per RaW (unless of course the effects of the blasts are separate powers, not additive to the damage which would be legal).  Defenses may or may not be covered on this, but the more I read that section, the more I think they would also be considered illegal, as they are additive to the defensive power.

 

Naked advantages in slots are also considered illegal, but they note that the GM may waive this issue for good reason.

 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

6 minutes ago, dsatow said:

Characters can have as many Power Frameworks as they want and can afford to buy. However, a slot in a Power Framework cannot add to or modify a slot in the same or another Power Framework, or the same or another Power Framework as a whole.  (6e1p398) So, you need to buy A blast outside the multipower to add to that blast. 

 

You also are not allowed to buy to slots which add to each other.  I believe this also means that the +8d6, +4d6, +2d6 aren't allowed to stack with each other on the outside power.  They must be separate powers.  So you might be able to get away with an 8d6 blast outside the multipower and add one of those slots to the 8d6 blast outside, but using two slots to add damage to the 8d6 blast outside I believe would be illegal per RaW (unless of course the effects of the blasts are separate powers, not additive to the damage which would be legal).  Defenses may or may not be covered on this, but the more I read that section, the more I think they would also be considered illegal, as they are additive to the defensive power.

For the third time this thread, second time this page, I post this. 

Quote

A character may have two Power Frameworks, or two slots in the same Framework, that both add to or affect the same ability bought outside any Power Framework (or the same Combat or Martial Maneuver, or the like). For example, a character could have a Multipower slot of +10 PD, and a Variable Power Pool slot of +15 PD, that both added to his PD, since his PD is not in any Power Framework and the two powers are not adding to each other.  (FRED p310, 6e1 p399)

Bolding mine. 

[Hugh Neilson]

The problem is in the inconsistent rules for "multiple slots" affecting the same power.  If we take Phil's construct:

 

70 MP

4f +8d6 Blast

2f +4d6 Blast

1f +2d6 Blast

3f +10 rPD/+10 rED

2f +10 rPD/+3 rED

2f +3 rPD/+10 rED

4f +40 m Flight

2f +20 m Flight

1f +10 m Flight

and 10 m of Flight outside the Multipower.

 

remembering that the previous example compared one character with a 12d6 Blast (60 points) and +20 rPD/+20rED and 60 meters of flight

 

to a second who had an 8d6 Blast, 10 rPD and 10 rED (so these slots are adding to powers outside the framework; let's also give him 3 PD and ED) and say "no way, can't have multiple slots with the same power", and spent 110 points on a Multipower.

 

What stops the second character buying, for the same 110 points:

 

3 meters of Flight

 

The following Multipower 5 times (70 points)

 

10 MP

1 f +2d6 Blast SLOT 1

1 f +4 rPD, +4 PD SLOT 2

1 f +4 rED, +4 ED SLOT 3

1 +10 m Flight SLOT 4

 

The following mutlipower 3 times (36 points)

 

10 MP

1 f +2d6 Blast SLOT 5

1 f +2 rPD, +2 PD, +2 rED, +2 ED SLOT 6

 

He can add up to 16d6 Blast, in 2d6 increments, capping out at 24d6

 

He can add up to +52 of either defense and +12 of the other, half Resistant, so 65 (36 resistant) and 15 (10 Resistant) or he can add +28 to one defense, +32 to the other, half resistant, for 41 and 45 (24 and 26 resistant)

 

He can get up to 54m flight and still augment his defenses to 25/19 each or keep a 14d6 Blast (or vary between those two)

 

He can typically assign 3 slots to Blast (adding to his base 6d6, he has 12d6), 3 SLOT 6,  to add +12 PD and ED, half resistant (adding to the baseline character's +10 rPD/+10 rED for 22 defenses, 16 resistant, plus his base PD and ED, so he has 2 defenses more, but 4 rdef less than our base character) and 2 Slot 4's so he flies at 23 meters, slower than our 30 m base character, but not by a lot.

 

This clearly games the system - he's using many tiny multipowers to avoid the added cost of variable slots.

 

Phil, I remain of the view that your comparisons are invalid, mainly because using fixed slots to simulate variable slots is not in the "spirit of the rules".  However, Phil's examples fit squarely within the letter of the rules - the character has a Blast, some PD and ED, some rPD and rED and some Flight outside any framework, so he can add multiple slots from the same MP, or slots from different MPs, to those powers.

 

I do see value to flexibility, but Phil, let's look at your proposed revised cost of a Flexible slot - how would a character similar to the one we're toying with above be build under that model, with one slot per power (Blast, either PD and ED separate or together, and Flight), if we started with the same 8d6 Blast, no Flight, +10 rPD/rED and 3 PD/ED character, and built his flexi-slot  MP with the remaining 110 points?

 

I'm pretty happy that the "variable slot" character I scoped out above, without "many slots for the same power" shenanigans is pretty capable.  How much more capable would he be under your model?

[PhilFleischmann]

18 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

What stops the second character buying, for the same 110 points:

 

[All that stuff]

 

This clearly games the system - he's using many tiny multipowers to avoid the added cost of variable slots.

What stops him?  Nothing in the rules stops him.  Only the GM can stop him.  Because it's 100% within the rules, it clearly shows that FLEXIBLE SLOTS ARE TOO EXPENSIVE, relative to fixed slots.  That is the only point I'm trying to make here.  It's not about campaign limits, or which powers can be in a framework (Mental Defense is a Special Power, but when you make it Resistant, it's no longer a Special Power?)

 

23 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Phil, I remain of the view that your comparisons are invalid, mainly because using fixed slots to simulate variable slots is not in the "spirit of the rules".

You know what else is not in the spirit of the rules?  Paying significantly more points than the utility is worth.  Not getting what you pay for.  I am in no way disagreeing with the spirit of the rules.  I am disagreeing with the letter of the rules.  Specifically the rule that makes flexible slots cost twice as much as fixed slots.

 

27 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I do see value to flexibility, but Phil, let's look at your proposed revised cost of a Flexible slot - how would a character similar to the one we're toying with above be build under that model, with one slot per power (Blast, either PD and ED separate or together, and Flight), if we started with the same 8d6 Blast, no Flight, +10 rPD/rED and 3 PD/ED character, and built his flexi-slot  MP with the remaining 110 points?

 

I'm pretty happy that the "variable slot" character I scoped out above, without "many slots for the same power" shenanigans is pretty capable.  How much more capable would he be under your model?

He wouldn't be more capable.  He'd be spending a more appropriate price for his flexible multipower.  To put it another way, he'd be more capable because he'd have some more points to spend on other things.  Which would put him on a more equal footing with another character who bought fixed slots (normal, single fixed slots, not the "system gaming" constructs above).

 

Your original construct was 180 points, with my revised cost proposal (which is just an initial estimate) it would be:

 

70 points for - An 8d6 Blast, +10 rPD/+10 rED and no Flight

70 point Multipower

v 10.5  +14d6 Blast

v 9.9 +22 rPD/+22rED

v 9.9 66 meters of Flight

= 170.3 points (I kept the decimals just to be transparent about any round-offs.)

 

So the character would have another 10 points to spend elsewhere.

 

Now in this particular example (the "Starburst-type" multipower),you're not likely to see a fixed-slot version of this, since you'll probably need defenses, movement, and attacks all at the same time, much of the time.  But if there were such a character, the slots would cost 7, 6.6, and 6.6, respectively, for a savings of (3.5+3.3+3.3=) 10.1.  So another 10 points to spend, in effect compensating him for his lack of flexibility.

 

Yes, flexibility is valuable, but it's not worth the same as raw power.  And indeed the cost of every other form of flexibility in HERO acknowledges this.