Ring of Regeneration

[Scott Ruggels]

Just now, Tech said:

 

Years ago, there was a ring of thefts where rings were pulled off of women's hands as they waited for a bus by various thieves. Fortunately, it stopped and/or the thieves were caught. The point? They could theoretically be easy to pull off but it's up to the GMs & players. If you want, don't give them any foci limitation - problem solved.

I would say that would be a "surprise/ Non-Combat situation" rather than in combat.  Unless the thieves were beating the victims until resistance was overcome...

 

[Tech]

On 2/11/2020 at 1:11 PM, Duke Bushido said:

 

That's a player decision, with GM approval.  Yes; you are right: rings aren't that hard to pull off of fingers as a matter of course (exceptions for those with advanced arthritis). 

 

But depending on how the player builds the ring, then this particular ring and this particular finger are a bit different. 

 

Agreed, Duke Rings can be bought any number of ways. Depends on the GM and player.

[Scott Ruggels]

from 6e rules:
Inaccessible Foci
An Inaccessible Focus can’t be hit with a Grab
or otherwise attacked for purposes of taking it
away from a character while that character is
in combat (an Inaccessible Focus could still be
targeted at -2 OCV to hit it for the purposes of
damaging it; see below). However, someone who
spends 1 Turn out of combat can take an Inaccessible
Focus away from a character (or otherwise
deprive him of its use and benefits). An Inaccessible
Focus cannot be removed from a character
who’s struggling or resisting. Some common
examples of Inaccessible Foci include powered
armor, magic rings, a belt, and similar items.

[iamlibertarian]

On 2/11/2020 at 11:11 AM, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

3 hours ago, Tech said:

 

Years ago, there was a bunch of thefts where rings were pulled off of women's hands by various thieves as women waited at a bus stop. Fortunately, it stopped and/or the thieves were caught. The point? They could theoretically be easy to pull off but it's up to the GMs & players. Hey, if the player wants, don't give them any foci limitation and the ring will never be taken.

On 2/11/2020 at 11:11 AM, Duke Bushido said:

That's a player decision, with GM approval.  Yes; you are right: rings aren't that hard to pull off of fingers as a matter of course (exceptions for thoae with advanced arthritis). 

 

But depending on how the player builds the ring, then this particular ring and this particular finger are a bit different. 

 

As an ER nurse, I can't tell you how many times we have had to use a Ring Cutter to get rings off of patients. That's why I think it should be left up to how the power was bought (Accessible vs Inaccessible).

As for Obvious or not, that too should be up to how the power was bought.

As for UBO, Regeneration itself says UBO cannot be purchased for Regen, which is why I was looking for other legitimate ways to create this power, since it is a staple of magical literature/games.

[Hugh Neilson]

On 2/5/2020 at 7:04 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

1/2d6 Healing BOD (5 points), Standard Effect (2 CP = 1 BOD), Decreased Re-Use (1 turn, +1 1/2), 0 END (+1/2), Constant (+1/2), Uncontrolled (+1/2) 20 AP IIF Ring (-1/4), Extra Time (only happens PS 12; -1 1/4), Limited Range (target must be close enough to receive the ring, -1/4), Target must wear ring throughout (-3/4), 5 Real Points.

 

On 2/11/2020 at 11:08 AM, Tech said:

 

For the 1/2d6 Healing power, don't forget 0 End, Persistent.  Is there any reason the ring wouldn't be IAF? Rings generally aren't that hard to pull off someone's hand.

 

It is 0 END.  It is also Constant, so I use a single action (placing the ring on my, or someone else's finger), after which it continues to activate with no further to hit roll needed.  It is also Uncontrolled - it just keeps going until it runs out of the END I placed in it.  Since it has 0 END, it just keeps running =- until the ring is removed.  As the target must wear the ring throughout, I cannot use the power on anyone else until he takes the ring off and I get it back.

 

Could it be OIF?  Sure.  IAF?  Can you remove it from an aware, resisting target as a single action?  Seems Inaccessible to me, but if you want it easy to remove, make it Accessible.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

21 minutes ago, iamlibertarian said:

As for UBO, Regeneration itself says UBO cannot be purchased for Regen, which is why I was looking for other legitimate ways to create this power, since it is a staple of magical literature/games.

I maintain that you should [request your GM] overrule the book.  It's by far and away the cleanest build.  Just Regeneration, UBO, Something Something Focus. 

You can hack it, such as with Constant Aid or Constant Healing or Transform but why? 

[Scott Ruggels]

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

I maintain that you should [request your GM] overrule the book.  It's by far and away the cleanest build.  Just Regeneration, UBO, Something Something Focus. 

You can hack it, such as with Constant Aid or Constant Healing or Transform but why? 

 

But it isn't UBO. it's a focus and applies it to the wearer. but the focus can be  passed to, or stolen from the original wearer. The regeneration does not continue to grant the original wearer  if someone else is wearing the ring.  Sometimes common sense should  take precedence from the rule hacking.

[dsatow]

BTW: My version of a 6th ed ring of regeneration.  If you take off the ring, you have to re-acclimate to the ring in 24 hours.  

 

14 Regeneration (2 BODY per Turn), Can Heal Limbs, Resurrection (57 Active Points); Extra Time (1 Day, Only to Acclimate, -2), OAF (-1)

 

[Duke Bushido]

9 hours ago, iamlibertarian said:

 

As for UBO, Regeneration itself says UBO cannot be purchased for Regen, which is why I was looking for other legitimate ways to create this power, since it is a staple of magical literature/games.

 

 

I'm really not trying to beat a dead horse here; I swear you you I'm not.  I would like to point out that UAA (or UAO, depending on what 6e calls it) is _not_ UBO, and it _will_ let you regenerate other characters. 

 

_Now_ I'm going to beat the hell out of that horse:  more than the increasing complexity of the text; more than the ever-compiling vastness of the rules and optional rules, that: that steady increase of "no", "" must, " and" only"-- all while shouting praises of "any thing you want; any way you want"--  is, above all else, the biggest reason I have no interest beyond academic in the newer editions. 

[Ninja-Bear]

14 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

from 6e rules:
Inaccessible Foci
An Inaccessible Focus can’t be hit with a Grab
or otherwise attacked for purposes of taking it
away from a character while that character is
in combat (an Inaccessible Focus could still be
targeted at -2 OCV to hit it for the purposes of
damaging it; see below). However, someone who
spends 1 Turn out of combat can take an Inaccessible
Focus away from a character (or otherwise
deprive him of its use and benefits). An Inaccessible
Focus cannot be removed from a character
who’s struggling or resisting. Some common
examples of Inaccessible Foci include powered
armor, magic rings, a belt, and similar items.

That’s why I’ve built a belt as OAF once so my daughter’s character could grab it in combat like the cartoons do.

[Tech]

Guys, I'm not pushing for the ring to be bought on way or the other. I see your POV. I just bought up other considerations. Btw, my mom was a nurse as well.   I've seen Green Lantern's ring stay on through crushing, punching, blasting, being hit by meteors and so on. I've also seen him fall down and the ring falls off. Depends on what the writers wanted. Really, it depends on what the GM/players decide. So, player, you don't want the ring falling off? Build it that way. You don't care one way or the other? Build it that way. Regardless of what the rules say, as Ninjabear mentioned: "The main object of the game is for the players and the GM to have fun. Champions 3rd ed. Pg 130".

 

I always emphasize the main object of the game. (I recall a thread I left because I kept trying to emphasize that but someone else kept objecting. Go figure.)

[iamlibertarian]

15 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

I'm really not trying to beat a dead horse here; I swear you you I'm not.  I would like to point out that UAA (or UAO, depending on what 6e calls it) is _not_ UBO, and it _will_ let you regenerate other characters. 

 

 

I am just beginning to discover, through additional reading, comments in these forums, and some of the powers Hero Games have directly created, that UAA is the cure-all for many powers which seem difficult to create (as long as it fits in each GMs paradigm of course). Pay a little more (reasonable most of the time) to create something out of the ordinary but still within Comic standards.

[iamlibertarian]

So would this work for most of you if you were running a game? At the start of an adventure where the Superheroes were about to knowingly go off to fight (a) demon(s), cast a spell on each of their existing hand weapons:

 

Through a VPP: +1 OCV, UAA (already constant and already 0 End), Armor Piercing, Uncontrolled, Only works against Demons? And then if they want to keep the weapon that way after the adventure, they have to pay CP for it?

 

 

[Duke Bushido]

Well, it's the way a number of my "bless item" spells are built, and almost all the superhero "healer" types my players have are built with UAA on Regen, so I'm going to have to say "yeah; I'm okay with it.".   

 

 

[pawsplay]

Rings do seem generally more like inaccessible foci. However, I am struggling to think of magic rings that don't get stolen. Frodo's gets taken from him, and Batman notoriously took the Green Lantern's ring in the New 52. It seems like there ought to be an intermediate level, for something which can be taken from a target that has been rendered helpless but can't be casually Grabbed.

[Duke Bushido]

4 minutes ago, pawsplay said:

It seems like there ought to be an intermediate level, for something which can be taken from a target that has been rendered helpless but can't be casually Grabbed.

 

 

Read "Inaccessible" again:  you _can_ remove inaccessible foci; you just can't simply snatch it away with a grab.

 

 

[pawsplay]

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

Read "Inaccessible" again:  you _can_ remove inaccessible foci; you just can't simply snatch it away with a grab.

 

 

 

I don't need to read it again. Read my post again. Or don't, I guess.

[Duke Bushido]

"a level for something which can be taken from a target that has been rendered helpless but can't be casually grabbed." 

 

 

CC p105:

 

An Inaccessible  Focus cannot be easily taken away from the character (examples include a ring or a suit of armor). It can be targeted in combat to damage it as above, but it cannot be Grabbed, Disarmed, or removed while the character is in combat or resisting. An Inaccessible Focus can be taken away from an unresisting target out of combat (or the target can otherwise be deprived of its use.) "

 

Is that not what you asked for? 

 

It's more detailed in the big books, of course,  but I had CC handy. 

 

 

[Hugh Neilson]

I think RAW is that it must be possible to remove the inaccessible focus in no more than a turn if the wearer is helpless.  A ring which can be removed in one action from a helpless target is removable in less than one turn, but can''t be grabbed off in combat.  Inaccessible.  You don't have to be at the absolute maximum.  You can have 30 charges, rather than 32.  Design the character first, then apply the mechanics.

[Duke Bushido]

Thanks, Hugh. 

 

Inaccessible _is_ the mid-level.  It's between a focus that is built without the Focus Limitation (cresting an item that simply cannot be taken away from the character because it exists purely as a special effect of simply _having_ the power) and a focus that can be snatched away by a well-timed grab. 

[pawsplay]

So, I was thinking more about this. One change in Dungeons & Dragons with 5e was the idea of item "atunement."  So a direct port of a ring of regeneration to Champions would probably not be Universal, but would actually be restricted to its attuned user. That's one way such an item might be balanced. If the item is intentionally meant to be passed around, then a kosher build would probably be something like one of the frankenbuilds posted above.

[pawsplay]

16 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

"a level for something which can be taken from a target that has been rendered helpless but can't be casually grabbed." 

 

 

CC p105:

 

An Inaccessible  Focus cannot be easily taken away from the character (examples include a ring or a suit of armor). It can be targeted in combat to damage it as above, but it cannot be Grabbed, Disarmed, or removed while the character is in combat or resisting. An Inaccessible Focus can be taken away from an unresisting target out of combat (or the target can otherwise be deprived of its use.) "

 

Is that not what you asked for? 

 

It's more detailed in the big books, of course,  but I had CC handy. 

 

 

 

I'm looking specifically for something that can't simply be Grabbed, but doesn't take an entire Turn to remove from an overpowered or helpless target.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

4 minutes ago, pawsplay said:

I'm looking specifically for something that can't simply be Grabbed, but doesn't take an entire Turn to remove from an overpowered or helpless target.

 

13 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I think RAW is that it must be possible to remove the inaccessible focus in no more than a turn if the wearer is helpless.  A ring which can be removed in one action from a helpless target is removable in less than one turn, but can''t be grabbed off in combat.  Inaccessible.  You don't have to be at the absolute maximum.  You can have 30 charges, rather than 32.  Design the character first, then apply the mechanics.

 

[pawsplay]

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

 

 

 

How would you note that on a character sheet? I can certainly spell 30 charges. I feel like that by just laconically posting these two posts, you feel like you are addressing what I said but you're really not. Just saying "close enough" does not mean there couldn't be a better approach. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of cases in 6e that exist precisely because somewhere between 3e and 6e, there was a perception something could be better defined.

"Some but not all of a limitation" is not the same thing as picking a lower or intermediate value. It really isn't. If you really feel like this isn't an issue which doesn't need to be addressed, definitely feel free to not address it.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

2 minutes ago, pawsplay said:

How would you note that on a character sheet?

Why does "Note: Focus can be removed with [desired action] if helpless." not work?