How Do You Build _____ In Champions Now?

[Pariah]

10 hours ago, nitrosyncretic said:

And anyway, multiform is for changing FORMS, not selecting options.

 

Based on my own reading, I'm not convinced that a reader--especially one long familiar with the Hero System--would necessarily come to this conclusion based only on what's in Champions Now.

 

Can someone point me to where this distinction is spelled out in the book? A page number would be sufficient. A quotation would be even more helpful.

[assault]

11 hours ago, nitrosyncretic said:

I do know, straight from Ron, that ... is intended

 

This is actually a problem.

 

If the game ever spreads beyond a niche market, it is only the intentions expressed in the text that will be available to most of its players.

[assault]

1 hour ago, Pariah said:

 

Based on my own reading, I'm not convinced that a reader--especially one long familiar with the Hero System--would necessarily come to this conclusion based only on what's in Champions Now.

 

Can someone point me to where this distinction is spelled out in the book? A page number would be sufficient. A quotation would be even more helpful.

 

The short version is: it isn't.

One quote should be enough to demonstrate this:
"The Multiform has Slots and a Pool, but no Control. It works well for heroes
whose powers can be split into modular options, so that they use either one
combination of them or another.

 

...

 

The pool may be as big as you like within the confines of the total character
points. (Yes, your entire hero may be expressed as varying slots within one huge
Multiform!) Conversely, the Multiform may be one small aspect of your character,
like a modular weapon."

 

My reading of this is that both "changing forms" and "selecting options" are supported by this.

The other references to Multiform in the text don't provide any support to excluding one or other of these.

So we are left with the written text, versus a second-hand "Ron intended". The former would probably take precedence in most games.

[pawsplay]

The gist may be that Multiform exists so you can make characters who transform, but the text clearly states that one consequence is that a modular weapon is also an option. Also, Ron says that anything is fair game if it works, we should be looking at what the character does, not some abstract concept. Also, also, Ron told me he found it perplexing people kept making characters with several powerful, versatile forms. He called them "Swiss army knife" characters. So focusing on the "actually has multiple forms" aspects can be overdone, too, in the Ron way of thinking. So I think it's safe to say Ron has some opinions, and he's also fine with other people have opinions. Champions Now is his thesis, what you do with it is on you.

[nitrosyncretic]

12 hours ago, pawsplay said:

The gist may be that Multiform exists so you can make characters who transform, but the text clearly states that one consequence is that a modular weapon is also an option. 

 

Hm. I do see that -- page 93. And yet, I had a conversation with him about creating Judge Dredd's gun (which has many different kinds of ammunition) and he specifically said that multiform was not for a device like that.

 

I wonder if this isn't one of those changes that  didn't get into the final text -- or whether he does, as you say, expect people to do what they like with what they read. After may conversations, I know he has said that he wants people to be creative with what is presented, at the same time, he's also said that the rules are rules and should not be discarded if you want to experience the game he has envisioned. By implication, one should be creative _within_ the constraints of the rules. 

 

In this case, of course, I can see the ambiguity in the text, so what the rule may still remain in his draft notes. I've encountered several instances of that and documented them as I learn his answers. 

[pawsplay]

What kind of different ammo does Judge Dredd have?

 

[assault]

Lots of different kinds.

[Pariah]

Something that just occurred to me... let's say you bought a 40 Point Multiform with five 40 Point slots. Each slot would cost 8 points. The total cost would be 80 points, and switching slots would be a 1/2 Phase action.

 

But... if you buy a 40 Point Variable Power Pool with the +1 Advantage "Change array as a 0-Phase action" on the Control cost, your total cost would still be 80 points. However, you could have a lot more than five 'slots', and changing them wouldn't use half your phase.

 

I must research and ponder this further.

[pawsplay]

18 hours ago, assault said:

Lots of different kinds.

 

Looking it over, I think Ron's objection might have been, why do you need a bunch of settings when these bullets all do almost the same thing? Dredd's gun seems like it could just be a piercing Blast, or maybe the Machine-gun power I posted above. Things like skip bullets, different payloads to deal with different kinds of targets, etc. all seem like just special effects. If he just uses AP ammo whenever he needs it, then the attack is Piercing. There is not a situation where he is not using armorpiercing ammo when he needs it.

[nitrosyncretic]

Here's some quotes from Ron Edwards on Adept Play Discord server, June 1, 2020 regarding multiform:

 

"This is why there is no Shapeshift power, for example; it's inherent in Multiform. The same goes for something much smaller in scale, like a device - if you want a Multiform for it, each slot has to look totally different, work differently, literally be as if it were a different thing."

 

"...different ammunition for the same gun, different arrows for Hawkeye's or Green Arrow's bow, different energy emitted from different vents in Iron Man's armor (repulsor rays vs. boot jets), different shapes of ice being formed at a wave of one's hand - none of these are Multiform."

 

He was quite emphatic.

[pawsplay]

So that seems to agree with what I said about Judge Dredd's gun. Different bullets are not slots, that is just the special effects of how the gun is enabled. So you don't have Piercing on armor-piercing bullets, the thing has Piercing because the character uses armor-piercing bullets when they need them, deforming/fragmentation when they need them, shaped charged when they need them, etc. Whatever the defense is, the gun performs optimally against it, so it has Piercing and it's a major number of points for the character.

But spraying the room is different than shooting one person. So a Multiform with an Area slot is valid.

[assault]

Likewise, a smoke arrow is different from a net arrow or a shoot-them-in-the-head arrow.

 

But a glue arrow isn't different from a net arrow, and you don't need five different kinds of shoot-them-in-the-head arrow.

 

That's entirely reasonable. However, a blanket prohibition on using Multiforms for such things should be considered as a House Rule.

 

That's not awful. It's well documented that even Gary Gygax used a bunch of house rules in his D&D games.

[Pariah]

"Emphatic", yes.

 

But still not in the book.

 

If it's not in the book, it's not in the rules.

[Pariah]

18 hours ago, assault said:

But a glue arrow isn't different from a net arrow....

 

But it might be. The glue arrow might affect one person, whereas a net arrow might affect an area. This will look different in terms of their special effects, of course.

 

But if you have a quiver diverse enough to have two different arrows defined as in tangles, maybe the VPP is a better option than the Multiform.

[pawsplay]

Two different arrows as entangles is just one Effect, that has the effect of all the things you can do with nets and/or glue. I could see maybe two powers if one was single target and one was a significant area, but honestly I don't think "actually affects a large area" net arrows are sensible. Similarly I don't see a glue arrow as accurately hitting one person and not covering the hex. I think both glue and net arrows are both simply Area (one hex) Entangle. If you want arrows that basically will do anything you want, within very wide parameters, I think VPP is in fact the way to go. That way you can have that net arrow that covers an entire room when you need it, explosive plastique arrows, armor piercing arrows, giant boxing glove arrows, stink arrows, glue arrows that affect one target, bolo arrows that use a regular attack roll, smoke arrows,  a swingline that lets you fly, etc.

I think an archer with a more coherent power, someone who isn't Silver Age Green Arrow, probably just has an Elemental Control with about three effects in it: Blast, Piercing, No Knockback (various offensive payload arrows), smoke arrow, and maybe grenade arrow.

[Pariah]

Tell me what you think about this power build:

 

Smaller Target: +1 Dexterity, Linked to Shrinking (-1/2), Constrained: Only to keep from being hit (-1/2)

 

10 Active Points

Real cost: 5 Points 

[unclevlad]

On 6/26/2020 at 6:43 PM, Pariah said:

Tell me what you think about this power build:

 

Smaller Target: +1 Dexterity, Linked to Shrinking (-1/2), Constrained: Only to keep from being hit (-1/2)

 

10 Active Points

Real cost: 5 Points 

 

For 5 points you can buy a skill level, which can be applied to defense.  The "only when shrunk" pretty much counters tying it to a specific maneuver, and it's less tortured IMO.  AND it won't hurt your ratio.

And given that Ron's nuking your movement too?  I actually wouldn't have a problem with saying the "+1 DCV" is part of the package.  Shrinking is one of those powers where I think Ron missed the boat, in terms of "descriptive" versus "mechanical."  The power as written is unclear, IMO.

[Pariah]

Okay, here's another one to ponder. Let's say my Red-headed Telepath has a 6d6 Body 0 Defense Entangle with the Ego-based Advantage. She hits the villain with this and rolls 5 Core damage (not a great roll). How does the villain get out?

 

Well, with his Ego score, obviously. But how does it work mechanically?

 

My initial thought, going back to previous (or is it subsequent?) editions is to use Ego like Strength. But in CNow, Ego is an "outcome" roll (succeed or fail) while Strength is an "effect" roll (how many dice). How to reconcile the two....?

 

Tell me what you think about this: A Strength of 3d6 would, under the other systems, represent a STR of 15 and would consequently carry a Characteristic roll of 12-. So, let's work backwards from the Ego score. Let's say the villain has a normal Ego of 11. This would correspond to an old-school EGO score of 10, which would be 2d6.

 

So on his next three Phases, the villain rolls:

* 3 BODY: The entangle is now down to 2 Body; the villain is still stuck.

* 1 BODY: There's still 1 Body remaining in the entangle; he's not out yet.

*2 BODY: The entangle is broken, and the villain has half a Phase to shoot back (or run).

 

Oh, and if the villain had 5 points in the appropriate Specialized Defense, them the Entangle would begin with 1 less die of Body.

 

Reasonable?

[nitrosyncretic]

Read the listing for Ego-Based advantage (p. 96) closely. It only changes the attack value to Ego. That's all.

 

[Pariah]

Just to confirm: If a character with Density Increase can't turn it off (e.g., is made living metal), must Density Increase be purchased with both the No Endurance and Persistent Advantages? Or is No Endurance sufficient? 

 

The text in the description of Always On seems to suggest the latter, but I'd like to be sure.

[pawsplay]

The latter. Always On specifies that Advantage. Also if you read the text of Persistent, is first of all reduces Endurance cost to 0 anyway, and has language about not turning on automatically. Always On would obviously supersede that.

[Pariah]

That's what I was thinking. Thanks!

[Pariah]

What Situation would one use to represent a character in abject poverty? I'm talking no job, no transportation, no idea where the next meal is coming from, that kind of thing.

[Pariah]

How might one build a Mind Link? I'm talking about how one character (an X-man, almost certainly) can create a mental link with all of her teammates. The power exists in Editions 4-6, but not in old-school Champions or Champions Now.

 

Here's my thought:

Telepathy, 3d6, Group Effect: Allies/Teammates (+1), Persistent (+1), Conditional: Willing targets only (-1), Constrained: Only for communication (-1/2) -- 45 Active Points, Real Cost 18 points

 

My justifications: Telepathy is pretty obvious. Group Effect lets her use it with more than one person at a time. Persistent gives her the ability to establish the link and then focus on other things. Willing Target may sound redundant with group effect, but I think of all the times that Wolverine said something like, "Stay out of my head, Red." Communication only means that she only has access to the thoughts her teammates choose to share.

 

Kind of expensive, and the character's ratio is going to take a significant hit, but I'm not sure how else to do it.

 

Thoughts?

[pawsplay]

18 hours ago, Pariah said:

What Situation would one use to represent a character in abject poverty? I'm talking no job, no transportation, no idea where the next meal is coming from, that kind of thing.

 

well, if it's obvious the character is homeless, and the characters gets a negative reaction, that's Unusual Looks.

If NPCs come along and are like, "Move along, you bum!" and the character's Presence is ineffective, that's Hunted.

If the character is secretly homeless, that's a Secret Identity.

If the character is a giant radioactive mutant that lives in a ditch, and people don't bother them, that's not really a situation.