incrdbil

Re: Okay, I'm spacin'... Currently nothing has the name Genocide; and I wouldn't expect to see the same--the mutant haters want to attract undecided normals to their side..using that name wont help. I can see the shadowy militant faction taking a name like Humans First! or something-but I wouldnt expect them to ever act openly, as it would create more sympathy for the mutants. The IHA needs to get ahold of a Mechanon copy and just slightly alter a few directives.

Re: Why the heck not?

Re: Why the heck not? The only way I'd allow the switch is if the characters EGO was equal, or less than Dex, and he had no more levels with ego based CV than he had with Dex based CV--often, mentalists feature lower Dex and higher Ego scores, so it would be an advantage to them to have non EGO powers use ECV to hit. In general, I'd rather not muddy the line between ego and dex based CV's.

Re: Special Entangle Selective and Personal Immunity perhaps?

Re: Special Entangle Call me crazy, but have you considered the 'personal immunity' advantage on the entangle?

Re: Crippling VPPs Cosmic VPP's can be dangerous things, despite their inelegance and glaring inefficiency at first. Find out a villains Weakness--if you haven't limited the VPP's realm of possible SFX, the next attack will be that special effect. and And with the 0 phase changes, there';s nothing to stop him switching from NND to NND till he finds the right one. Thats why it has a stop sign. Some GM's may be happy with that. Others may say VPP's are limited to certain sfx by nature (gadget pools cant do magic, of course), and pools have to buy a 1/4 advantage to simulate any special fx. Put too many limits on it though, and you'll sort of negate the purpose of VPP's in the first place, it is a fine balancing point. I'm more comfortable with VPP's limited to certain effects, Gadget Pools, Mental Power Pools; Fire Based Pool, Mimic Pools. I ran a PC with a fairly unlimited Cosmic Power pool (only limit was no mental/BOECV powers) and wow, it was just scary; I started pulling myself back in, especially after a conflict with another power pool user (magic). We both had absorbtion running too, and while doing some damage to each others, we were juicing ourselves up to silly levels, even figuring in the points reduction for control cost --we then teamed up against a bigger threat; he cooked off a 20d6 or so suppress on a tarert (supressing resistant defenses) and I uncorked an autofire HKA (with boosted strength, of course)..and rolled a three, which in that campaign resulted in max damage. I think the GM defined the target as reduced to atoms or something like that...We sort of pulled back, reviewed and revamped..and a bit later, I hads a power accident, lost abilities, and became a gadget pool character, and the Mage kept the VPP (picked up a reactionary CvK), and a -0 limitation about needing a spell formula--ie, allowing the GM to off limit certain builds selectively).

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? wow, he keeps getting more out of touch with reality. "The difference is that alot of times these OIF is not enforced, because GMs are running games with far too many characters with most of the time complex power builds in complex campaign settings. This is one reason OIF has become so "cliche"." Translation from Bizarro English: 'the problem my group has with reading basic rules and applying them must apply to everyone else. Making up a new unclear rule will obviously be easier to enforce than the ones already existing. After all, the way I think power armro should work will obviously be embraced by all who don't mind having their options limited' "The idea that people are going to drop out of Powered Armor because even without the limitation they can still have some problems with the armor just doesn't fly!!" The idea that players will cheerfully take the penalities of limitations without getting the benefits will fly about as well as Mount Rushmore.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? "Power Armor (no limitation) 1) Can be damaged, destroyed, removed from the owner when unconscious, 2) Lost, stolen, or taken away temporarily 3) Requires minor maintenance (polish, painting, etc..) 4) Systems test performed on a irregular basis 5) Non-ferrous 6) Don in a normal time (set up by GM)" wow--what a screw job for players wanting to play power armor charcters. OIF, but no reward; penalized with maintenanace time (when did superhero games turn into maintyenance tracking equipment centered games? As for time to don it--its the same time to change into any costume--one phase, unless you have instant change) no PA characters will exist under this sche,e. "Power Armor (-1/4 limitation) 1) Can be damaged, destroyed, removed from the owner when unconscious, 2) Lost, stolen, or taken away temporarily 3) Requires minor maintenance (polish, painting, etc..) 4) Systems test performed on a regular basis 5) Non-ferrous or ferrous (if magnetics are rarely used) 6) Don in double normal time (set up by GM)" Oh yeay--the same points saving as OIHD, just can now be damaged, taken away far more often, the same ridiculous concenrs about maintenance (he thinks players wont blow that off or ignore it, but cant play OIF properly), ditto about the system tests--and now, he doubles the time to put on the armor (and seems to hint it will be longer than standard)--so that cociievably be another minor limitation the player is cheeated of. PA characters still non existant in a campaign with this one. "Power Armor (-1/2 limitation) 1) Can be damaged, destroyed, removed from the owner when unconscious, 2) Lost, stolen, or taken away temporarily 3) Requires minor maintenance (polish, painting, etc..) 4) Systems test performed on a strict schedule 5) Ferrous (if magnetics are regularly used) 6) Don in extended time (set up by GM)" Virtually no difference between the 1/4 and 1/2 version other than the 'strict schedule' and extended time to put it on. Broken, painfully broken--and he thinks this wont be abused more.

Re: (somehow) realistic Secret IDs If the government has metahuman level resources cracking Identitities--detects, mind scan..secret ID's may be very fragile. However, such resources then become the target of angry metahumans.....

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? "That's fine, to a certain degree. Did he ask, " If taken from you, can it be used by someone else agianst you or another opponent?" Perhaps the question would be "can you just give it to anyone else and they can use it?". If its not a universal Focus, it has to be bought usable by others. (not a rocket science matter of question) "I agree. But, for those players and GMs who get tired of the "cliches", the idea of removing one cliche may appeal to them." OIF isn't a cliche. Power armor isn't a cliche. In LB's case, it's not about removing a cliche, its dictating how character concepts must be doen according to hsi point of view. And I notice he still can't come up with his revolutionary framework on his own.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? Well, I've never used it here, but in general, it usually means you no longer see posts from the one you have ignored; the only way you will see anythign they say if they are quoted by someone else.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? did you mean that as a good thing or a bad thing?

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? maybe LB is speaking some form of Bizarro-World English.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? Yeah, we know that. Its the astounding mental gymnastics LB's goign through due to his inability to grasp basic rules, and admit that he doesn't have a clue as to what he's talking about or trying to accomplish that have us mesmerized. I mean, look at that last post. Heck, in hero temss, that was a 4D6 entangle (Unstoppable Laughter or amazement), BOECV, vs Ego not Strength, Invisible, Loses 1 Body per minute, OAF Computer area of Affect, Enough MegaArea to affect the world, Limited only to those on the Internet reading a particualr message thread. Wait, I demand someone make a framework to represent that effect!

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? For someone trying to design a rule, not caring about mechanics is a bad omen. So aliens don't have powered armor? Mutants with a armor suit that grants them flight, protection, enhanced senses, and characteristics aren't in power armor? Ok, for the Legion of the Ignored, another PA thought. Take your armor as OIHD: but to reflect the fact it may be damaged (but rarely, if ever taken away), take a disadvantage borrowed in concept from mechassasain: Susceptibility--for every point of Body from an attack above a certain amount directed at the armor, for every Body taken by the character, he loses X amount of points that have to be repaired, and do not naturally come back. This would simulate systems slowly degrading, instead of, like with a focus, being taken out completely. With a focus, your chances of losing 50 Str or +1 to perception are equal--with the diasadvntage approach, you lose a certain amount of points, possibly taking out multiple small systems. Allow the player to ramp up the loss past the 3d6 level if they want. To regain lost powers, you may have to make a Gadeteering roll (getting 3 points back per point you make the roll by), or maybe you could even build a repir subsystem (Aid, only to repair effects of susceptibility to starting value, self only, continuous, maybe add extra end, or Concentration as you see fit) And I almost forgot--physical limitation, loses all powers when armor is lost/taken/destroyed (infrequent, greatly limiting)--but only if the armor isn't bought OIHD. In terms of points effectivness, you'ld be stupid to do that though--OIHD saves far more points, and PC's can always find enough disadvantages

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Kristopher again.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? So the weaponmaster types with guns/bows with a a big multipower dont count? the various Foci for some mentalists, magicians that give them EC's, or a host of tohers don't? (repeat this to LB, and try to remind him the difference between attacks and disagreement) So only PA fX get changed. Any other concept that uses OIF in the same fashion, but claims a different FX, doesn't get changed--well, at least he's answered the question we asked, to looks of disbelief or the sounds quiet laughter. I thought the problem was that the OIF limitations weren't being applied--so LB's assertion that OIF is only broken when used by players with PA characters? By LB's reasoning, any widely used limitation should be examined for replacing by an fx specific framework. This type of design philosophy makes 1st edition AD&D look revolutionary. Well, this thread might be interesting as he Legion of the Ignored come up with some insightful power armor bits-in fact, the temptation to do this while knowing LB can't see it is overwhelming--all the useful information he might like, floating by because of his temper tantrum. Oh there's ironic justice in that. Ok, multiform power armor types, each Multiform bought OIHD--who wants to develop that one? We've already had the EC/disadvantage appropach. Or maybe drudge a variation of an old old chestnut -- defining all PA abilities as Move/attackk/Defend/Percieve, then modify with limitations. Vehicle based PA. Hmm, now how to simulate someone who transfers their consciousness, or is cybernetically linked to an automaton--maybe taking sympathetic stun onlydamage via feedback for some version.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? Note the non-ignored: just quote the posts pointing out the mile wide holes in this, unless you prefer to do this yourself. So far: All Power armor is alike (When all power Armor isn't alike..but hey, if you like running cookie cutter games with cookie cutter classes..D20 is that-a- way) Drawning Inspiration from Fuzion. (Equivalent to growing crops on a toxic dump) As for the second part--that's different from non power armor foci in what way?

Re: An odd question Depends on what comic boosk they read growing up. I'm sort of serious--I mean, background and how they were raised means a lot, who they look up to, and other life influences. Perhaps the current world situation has been rough on them--they are more likely to change the world. If life is pretty darn good, they may have a different viewpoint, or maybe even be status quo fighters (No one's messing up my free ride!) Others might be of the selfish 'the world cant take care of itself, I'm taking care of me). I think that would be a significant number, but not the majority. You'ld probably get a healthy number of change the worlders, since that age is replete with people who think they know how the world works, and are still naive enough to believe they know better than everyone else.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why?

Re: Seeking a little gming advice It may be best to have a group meeting, a sit down, and do a little 'campaign ebvisioning'--perhaps describe a typical scenario, ask the players their likely character reactions/tactics--then explain the probable results in the campaign world as you have it in your mind right now. It might suprise the players--their reactions might suprise you. From that point, you can open up a discussion and move in whatever direction seems best to where you are all on the same sheet of music. You can set the scale of a campaign where killing isn't going to immediately have them hunted down, but it better be justified--killing an agent when its been shown time and again they cant hurt you wont fly, unless he is about to severely injure/kill someone else and you have no other non-lethal alternative. Let them know with good examples when the gloves can come off, and when they have to act like heroes. But maybe the players are wanting to play a vigilante camaign where the bodycount rivals action films consider revising the campaign, maybe even grabbing Dark Champions. If the players really want 'Punisher' style games, you'll just have problems trying to force Justice League on them without some serious discussion.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? Well, you are free to believe whatever you want. . Regardless, your belief won't lead to a change in the rules, or a framework for a special effect; if players/GM's will not use focus rules properly, they wont use whatever framework properly is devised to replace the focus rules. (And there wouldn't be a prohibition from powert armor users from using the focus rules instead of the PA framework anyway). But let's say a Power Armor framework exists--the frameworks in existance, in general, make a character usually capable of doing more with fewer points. Multipowers give a player access to a lot of powers, albeit only one, or some, at a time; EC's give reduced costs to as many powers the player can work in. Power pools, while more expensive than just one straight out power, can offer up a potentially unlimited number of powers (the only limit being the number of unique power/advantage/limitations). So, whatever framework made for Power Armor users was dreamed up, it would would work in a similar manner--providing access to powers at some break in cost. Well, focus does that. If the limitations of power armor aren't properly executed by the GM using foci rules, what will a framework in and of itself do? And if its deemed that power armor is no limitation whatsoever, then why should it have a new framework to lower costs? You say the rule is being abused--their is no Power Armor rule, their is only the focus rules, which is what we're really talking about. the focus rules, as written, are fine. If GM's dont use them properly, no replacement rule will change anything--the same GM will simply not use the replacement rule properly, since obviously the GM believes Power Armor shouldn't be subject to the clear limitations that were already covered under focus rules. The best argument you've put forward, really, is to not use any focus limitations at all, since people won't play out the effects of a limitation.--unless you have something to show that OIF: Pistol/Amulet/Ring is less prone to being abused that OIF: Power Armor. Heck, if GM's can't use focus limitations properly, you may as well dump the majority of, if not all, limitations, because there is no assurance they won't mess those up as well. That's it--there's nothing more to say. If you still feel different, then we can just amicably agree to disagree, and conduct games as we best see fit for the enjoyment of all. To steal from Eddings, I believe we've exhausted the possibilities of this conversation.

Re: OIF for Powered Armor why? That would be only if the rest of us had games where OIF limitatiosn were not properly played--or games characters who did not take a limitation are treated like they have that limitation anyway, unfairly. Perhaps you try some games where the limitation is played properly, and then see how it works.