Ice9

Re: Movement Multipowers Actually, in 6E, isn't this even more similar to an attack Multipower? Since the multiple attack rules don't distinguish between multiple uses of the same attack and multiple different attacks, it's pretty much the same situation as movement types. There is Combined Attack, but that's not something that always applies. And I've never felt that "not being able to use it at the same time" was the sole reason for Multipowers. Many small powers are just generally not as powerful as one huge power. For instance, having a bunch of minor psychic investigation powers like object reading, minor precognition, empathic perception, and so forth isn't as strong as having one huge Telepathy power that can read the mind of everyone in the city. This is true even if you'd never use the powers at the same time or otherwise be hindered by Multipower.

Re: Love for Non-Casters? From what I've seen here, and on other FH discussions, I find it interesting that in HERO - a definitively classless system - people seem to construct archetypes as restrictive as any class-based structure. While there's certainly nothing wrong with a given character not using any magic, the dichotomy between "magic-users" and "warriors" seems a bit bizarre. In a world of magic and legend, where are the warriors who are blessed by the gods, or can ride the lightning, or enhance their skills with runic tattoos? Magic is a continuum, not a "warrior/mage" switch. Also, while "magic can do anything, martial skill is limited to what seems realistically possible" is valid for a setting, "Bob's character can do anything, Joe's character is limited to what seems realistically possible" probably isn't right for a campaign. If you say magic trumps all, then either there should not be non-magic-using PCs, or they should explicitly be sidekicks. To do otherwise isn't a system problem, it's a setting/campaign problem.

Re: Love for Non-Casters? The equivalent to a framework would be ... a framework. There's no reason a martial character can't or shouldn't use a MP or even VPP - after all, the number of different combat moves alone, not to mention presence, luck, and skill based abilities, is potentially limitless. As for limitations, I pointed out a number of appropriate ones in my last post. But here's a concrete example: Art of Assassination - Multipower, OIF(dagger of opportunity), RSR (KS: Anatomy), Limited Power: Only vs Creatures with Appropriate Body Structure, Limited Power: Target Must be at Reduced DCV, Linked, Conditional Power: Linked Attack Must Hit 1) Arterial Wound: HKA, NND, Does Body, Continuous, Uncontrolled (stopped by healing magic or successful first aid) 2) Blinding Strike: Sight Flash 3) Hamstring: Drain Running and Leaping 4) Arm/Shoulder Wound: Drain Strength and Dexterity, Limited: Only with arm. 5) Silencing Strike: Darkness (Hearing) 1", Uncontrolled, Sticky (only to stick to target), Limited: Only to prevent speech. 6) Stunning Attack: Suppress SPD, Instant. NOTE: Only needs to suppress momentarily to make target lose 1-2 phases.

Re: Love for Non-Casters? As far as point saving, the "divide by three" is really the big factor here, and I would probably ignore it unless casters had some significant general limitations. Frameworks can easily be used by a non-caster - for instance, I would expect a cunning warrior-type to have, for combat alone: * Climbing onto the backs of large creatures and up walls. * Attacks which hamstring, blind, or otherwise hinder people beyond normal damage. * Augmented presence attacks - when slaying someone, for instance. * Setting traps, distraction maneuvers, trick shots. Which could easily be in a Multipower or other framework. As for limitations, there are plenty: * OAF (obviously). * RSR: Combat school skill, or KS:Anatomy * Extra Time (probably only at Full-Phase/Extra Phase level, but still). * Side Effects (leaves self open after maneuver) * Increased END * Only vs Creatures with appropriate anatomy.

Re: raziel (limited immortality) Is the new body he resurrects in an existing character in the physical world, or some kind of body from the spirit world? For the latter, Resurrection linked with Teleportation (to move to the new spot) and Shapechange (to look different) would do it.

Re: Skills in Science Fiction The problem with everyman skills or familiarity-only levels is that 8- is really not good odds of success. Now sure, sometimes there are bonuses from extra time, special tools, or assistance - but that doesn't apply to all skills. Even with those, an 8- is generally insufficient, because someone competent at their job should be succeeding almost all the time when they have the ideal setup, meaning either those things are giving a 7+ bonus, or their base skill is higher than 8-. And with decent Int/Dex/Pre, there's no intermediate step between 8- and 13-, so even if you only "need" an 11-, that's not going to save you any points.

Re: Inherent: SFX, any? Gills should be as inherent as lungs are. While it can certainly makes sense to create a gill-clogging substance, it equally makes sense to create a throat clogging substance. In either case, it's rather abusive for a Drain 2d6 to be an insta-kill. That aside, there are plenty of cases where Inherent makes undeniable sense. Someone who is a sentient swarm of insects is going to be partially Desolid, and dispelling that makes no sense. See also: many senses, extra limbs, HKAs that represent claws or teeth, and a number of other things. The bigger issue is that Suppress isn't one really one power, it's two related powers: 1) Block/weaken an ability someone has. 2) Cause someone to be hindered, such that they are worse in a specific area. For the first form (anti-mutant serum, electromagnetic dampener, etc) it makes no sense to Suppress things like normal running, being naturally lighter than air, or wearing armor. For the second form (high-gravity field, molecular destabilizer, accelerated icing-up), whether a power is natural makes no difference (and often, Power Defense makes no difference, so they should really be AVAD).

Re: Summon specific being? Thinking about it, it should probably be split into two: Summon One Specific Being - i.e. summon the ghost of Benjamin Franklin. +0 advantage - the upsides (better relationship, giving them equipment) balance the downsides (if they're out of commission, you're screwed). If the Summon was already "Loyal", I'd say this would actually be a -1/4 limitation, as being able to bargain in advance isn't necessary. If they were already "Slavishly Devoted", it'd be -1/2, for the same reason. Summon Any Specific Being - i.e. summon the ghost of this murder victim, summon the ghost of the former guard to tell us the access codes, etc. This would probably be worth +1, it seems pretty potent.

Re: Get away from me. I consider it an excellent reason to use those powers. Flat out: a power that only does knockback, should do more knockback, for the same Active Points, than one which also does damage. The Only for Knockback limitation? Usually doesn't matter. For the majority of the builds out there, Real Points don't mean crap. If you're using a Multipower, or VPP, or your GM uses AP caps ... then Limitations don't help you one iota. Also, a lot of these constructions were developed in 5E, where Double Knockback's +3/4 cost made it unreasonably expensive, often giving only 1" more Knockback with than without it. For someone still using 5E, this is still the case - Double Knockback is just not worth putting on Energy Blast unless you're already piling on the advantages. And besides - this isn't the cheesy way to do it. The cheesy way to do it is with movement powers Usable as Attack.

Re: Summon specific being? Being away from my books right now, I'm unsure of one thing - if you get "Specific Person" and "Expanded Class of Beings", can you summon any specific person within that class? Because that would often be an advantage. Other than that, I guess it does let you build up more of a relationship with that specific summon - do any bargaining in advance, so you don't have to haggle in the middle of a fight. And you could give the summoned creature equipment that they'd have when you re-summoned them. Still sounds more like a +0 advantage though - the downsides are about equal to the upsides.

Re: Get away from me. Whoops, must have been remembering wrong. Well that tones down the crazy, but you can still do: Suppress SPD 6d6, Does Knockback, Double Knockback Only 5" average knockback, but it does lower someone's SPD by two points, which is enough to make them miss 1-2 phases, depending on when you do it. And you don't need to maintain it - just having changed their SPD for a single phase gives you the same stalling power.

Re: Get away from me. Dispel SPD? Because it stuns people momentarily? I think it'd re-activate on their next phase, but that next phase wouldn't happen as soon. Actually, that could be fairly potent: Dispel SPD 10d6, Does Knockback, Double Knockback On average, 3 SPD dispelled, 13" knockback. If you go by the official rule on changing SPD, I believe they wouldn't get a phase until their old and new SPD shared one, potentially losing most of a turn. Even with the (IMO) saner "until their old and new SPD would both have had a phase", they still lose 1-2 phases, depending on when you hit them.

Re: Controlled (?) Growth Concepts One issue with this is that power use frequency isn't the same thing as how important a power is, or even how good the character should be with it. For instance: 1) A thunder mage can call forth lightning. For minor use, he can make a small thunderclap which knocks someone over and briefly stuns them. He can also go full-out and call down a huge lightning storm, but this exhausts him and would cause collateral damage anywhere with people around. Because of this, he generally uses the thunderclap and saves the lightning storm for last-ditch situations. As a result, the thunderclap keeps growing in power while the lightning storm doesn't - eventually, the "minor" thunderclap is actually more powerful. 2) A delivery man, caught up in a web of conspiracies, begins developing luck powers. Since the character (not the player) is totally unaware what's going on, it makes no sense for him to intentionally try using new powers or training them before they appear. As a result, there's really no way for him to gain any new powers in this system. 3) A mad scientist has rocket boots, among his other inventions. He uses them all the time. But using them frequently isn't going to make them better, and if he decides to upgrade something, it wouldn't necessarily be the rocket boots - they work fine already.

Re: FH Player who wants character to BE an amulet These two seem to conflict. If the amulet is actually possessing people (not just as the SFX for a Multiform, for instance), then why would it have any STR/DEX? Personally, I'd do it one of two ways: A) High Risk, High Reward: The amulet is a character with no STR/DEX, very small size, probably the automaton powers (takes only BODY, no hit locations), and a major physical limitation (immobile). It has the powers Clinging (to keep from falling off when the host goes flying), Possession (a BoECV Transform, Major, only on host), and Mind Link (only to people wearing the amulet). On the plus side, you can control anyone, even those with unique abilities. On the down side, you can no guarantee that there will be anyone available to control, or that someone doesn't grab the amulet away from them (although Clinging will at least make that non-trivial). Playing it Safe The possession is mostly SFX. You get a Multiform, with one form being the amulet, and the other being a possessed person. The possessed form has OIF (available host) to enter. The "possessed person" form should probably have a limitation on their physical stats (Only up to level of Host), and maybe a small VPP to represent different abilities the host may have. Also, Ressurection (Only if killed in Possessed form, not in Amulet form). On the plus side, with the host effectively being a focus, you have a reasonable expectation to usually have one, and you don't have to defend the amulet separately. On the down side, you might not have access to the abilities of an unusually strong host, and the "host" isn't really gone, unless you link an EDM in there.

Re: Post "gotchas" here Agreed - it can sort of work for magical illusions, but for something like a hologram or a bubble-thin shaped polymer balloon, it's still there whether you believe in it or not. I think Linked Darkness may be the right way to do it, however, as giving it for free makes Images pretty much superior to Darkness all around.

Re: Tremorsense In the d20 version, you can detect which 5' square the creature is in (hence ~1m precision), but not their exact position, and not what their upper body is doing. As a result, it's like fighting someone in the dark - even if you know where they're standing, you're going to have a hard time hitting them.

Re: 5th Ed: Flying Dodge Desolid is a lot more points though. Sure, you can put it in a Multipower, but that does assume you have an appropriate MP that you're not using for another purpose. And FD is already a very useful movement power - for a speedster, you can move entirely out of sight or catch up to a fleeing enemy, while getting the benefits of dodging. That said, I think it's mostly fine, but the "auto-avoid any HTH attack" part pushes it into "best manuever ever" territory.

Re: 5th Ed: Flying Dodge The way we've been using it, you don't get to auto-avoid an attack that you abort in response to (you do get the +4, but the movement occurs after the attack). You could abort to it before the attack (when the attacker moves toward you), but then they'd be able to do something else with their half phase. On closer inspection, it does let you auto-avoid attacks, but I don't think we'll switch - it's already one of the better manuevers, even without that.

Re: Tremorsense If you're going with d20 Tremorsense, it shouldn't be fully targetting - it can determine the position of a creature (to a precision of ~1m), but you still take the penalties for attacking an invisible creature. Blindsense is the same thing, but they don't have to be touching the ground, and Blindsight would be full-on Spatial Awareness.

Re: Gun Summoning You're right actually, the "Retrieve" power would work for both purposes. I was thinking of a different build where the retrieving is done by a separate entity in the extradimensional space. An alternate way of constructing the power, Bag of Holding style, would be something like: Shadowspace: EDM, Continuous, 0-End, AoE Hex; Portal, Only in Shadow/Darkness, Only Handheld Objects Shadow Grasp: Stretching 3m, Only into Shadowspace. Quick Draw 15- I'm not sure this would work for transporting ammo directly into guns though.

Re: Post "gotchas" here While interesting, I don't think this gives any better correlation between true effectiveness and Active Points than the standard system. For instance, 0-End, while potentially potent with continuous powers, generally doesn't make a power any stronger in terms of effect. Usable by Others - especially Usable as Attack - can make a power vastly more potent. Ultimately, I think powers vary so much that there's no reliable rule for whether a modifier "should" be affecting the active points or not. Extra Time (extra phase) on a Blast? That's a significant weakness, and would merit a higher base DC, IMO. Extra Time (extra phase) on a Summon? Often won't even matter, not a reason to have a more powerful Summon than normally allowed. For which reason, I prefer a combination of rough DC (not AP) caps and case-by-case ruling.

Re: Animate Flame A Summon is only necessary if: * The flame can go do things without your direct control - like ordering it to pursue an enemy who runs out of your view. * The flame can do a variety of things, like picking things up or using manuevers. * The flame can be attacked directly, not just via Dispel. Even then, Physical Manifestation could cover this. The fact that the power seems to be short duration and requires concentration makes me think a Continuous power, like CrosshairCollie's build, would fit the best. However, if you did go with Summon, it's not necessarily that expensive. At a base level, something like: Summon 100p Flame Sprite, Automaton (+1), (40 active points); OIF (flame of opportunity, -1/2), Concentration (-1/2), (20 real points) Would give you a 100p creature, probably sufficient for anything short of a bonfire. If you want multiple flames, you can have eight of them at once for only 15 more points.

Re: OMCV Whats it good for (besides Mental Powers) Actually, I was thinking about that, and if you're not planning to buy up your DMCV, you might as well sell it back too, maybe get some EGO or Mental Defense instead. Against a mentalist with a decent OMCV, DMCV 3 is no more helpful than DCV 3. As for the reasoning - Zen-Style Mental Countermeasures Training. By emptying the mind of all struggle, and bending with the incoming attack rather than trying to block it, the hostile force will flow past like a river, leaving you relatively untouched. In a world where mental powers are a fact of life, I can see agencies like UNTIL providing this type of training to their operatives.

Re: Multipower imbalance Actually, I'm in favor of even the non-combat Multipower. I think they're costed correctly, by the principle that you shouldn't have to pay out the ass for versatility. Being able to use any of five 30p powers is not generally as powerful as being able to use one 150p power - and that applies in combat or out of it. Let's say Multipower didn't exist: take two psychic detectives. One of them has an array of fairly low-strength powers - empathic telepathy (senses only emotions), limited object-reading, dowsing, maybe some enhanced tarot. Could be appropriate for a Dark Champions game. The other takes the same amount of points and buys a huge-ass Telepathy power. He can, just by glancing at someone, read their entire memories without them noticing. Now is that balanced? Hell no. Versatility is worth something, but not the entire sum - and Multipower is the right balance point.

Re: Persistent vs. Costs END Only to Activate By KO'd, I actually meant "reduced to below 0 stun", which is not that uncommon, IME. And long duration usage is still a benefit. In what cases would you find Half-END to be even close to as good as extra END, however? For instant powers being autofired, sure. I just don't think it's very useful for continuing powers, which is where OCETA steps in.