Hugh Neilson

I agree with Redmenace that you shoyuld get CON up to 23. This costs you another 16 points. You recover 7 of that in STUN and 6 in REC, so you're only really paying 3 points (plus boosting ED 3 and END 26 - settle for only +20 END and the CON is paid for)

Duplicate martial maneuvers can be cleared if you've paid for the same one more than once. A "Strike" can be a punch or a kick - you don't have to pay once for each.

Total defenses are 16/14 (16/17 with 23 CON), which is probably enough for a character whose main defense is avoiding attacks.

I'd consider a higher DEX (33 or even 35) before I'd buy more BOD, but that's just me. He can get a 17 DCV with his levels, if he puts all in DCV and uses a no DCV modifying maneuver.

A 10 PRE and a 10 EGO means presence attacks will cost you some phases. That's offset a bit by your high speed, but not bveing able to act in your first phase means being an easy target, something you can't afford. I would buy some presence only to resist PRE attacks to solve this.

I don't see a lot of need to buy END - you'll have a base 46 with 23 CON, and you'll use what - 2 for STR and maybe 1 to run in a phase? At 15 REC, that 46 END will last a long tim, even spending 21 per turn. I'm also not a big fan of buying up Stun, but that's personal preference.

You could shave a few points by making FW only on martial attacks - what else will you likely use?

I'm not certain how you're working the multiform. At first, I thought all the base form's disad's carried over, but that's clearly not the case as the characteristic maxima on DEX and Speed would kill you. I think you are operating on the basis you pay 50 to get a 250 point base, and add in disadvantages from there.

The cost is actually 1/5 of the total points of the second form, including disadvantages (so 350/5 = 70 points). The second form has the same base points as the base character (150), so you need to take 250 points of disadvantages in the second form to balance him.

You could get a point break on the multiform if you revert to Harold if knocked out. Given your description of the change (to Kudo when fighting starts, back after), you might want to consider an Accidental Change disadvantage. It's to Harold's advantage to change in most cases, but the automatic shift back if the fighting's done could be a drawback (since Hardold stioll needs a half phase to change back, and won't have those extra defenses until he does).

Some form of healing/regeneration can be handy for low DEF characters, who are prone to take body. Logically, Kudo (an immortal) could have regeneration, and pass this along to Harold due to their joined nature.

whoa...just noticed that 150/100 thing...

The construct is legal, but as a GM, I would not allow any structure (multiform, duplication, slavishly loyal summon) which allows a character who exceeds the campaign point limits. I would restrict Kudo to 150/100 like any other PC.

In a 250 point campaign, his abilities will make him a combat monster, virtually unstoppable. Talk to your GM about campaign norms - I suspect Kudo would be competetive with fewer/no levels, lower attack DC's, reduced Speed and/or less (or even removed) Find Weakness.

The standard for supers in this range is 3-8 Speed, Combat Values of 6-11 (your DEX alone puts you at the high end - the levels put you well above), 6-12 damage classes (eg. 12d6 strike, or 6d6 NND) and defenses of 12 (6 resistant). You're at or above the high end of the scale in pretty much all categories, so scaling back wouldn't be too tough.

Originally posted by OddHat

You've answered your own protest Hugh. You can mistreat your summoned toaster all you want and it won't rebell. Though it would be cool if it did.

Depends on the toaster (watch Red Dwarf).

The "easy to control by me" is offset by the "easy to control by anyone else as well". My Summoned toaster will toast Dr. Destroyer's bagel. My summoned zombie won't carry his luggage.

Originally posted by Blue Angel

Oh. Except you couldn't summon that particular van back again unless you got the "summon specific van advantage" which would be a waste on a minivan when any one will do the same thing. Once he has stolen the van it is his. And since the van left under it's own power you are now released to summon another one.

Don't get me started on the "summon specific" advantage. Apparantly, if you always want a blue van, you have to pay double...

A better question may be what happens to the "old" van when you summon a new one. Depends on special effects, I guess - is it created from thin air (and if so does it dissipate back when you summon a new one), or is there a van manur=facturer out there with a lot of inventory leakage?

Originally posted by RadeFox

But you could designate the sound the Force wall makes as a sound that is annoying to most known insects and animals. Like a UV squeal or somesuch, to make the whole thing a bit more solid state.

Actually, I'd envision this being a lot like a fire - it keeps the animal predators away, but you're way more noticable to the sentient beings that may be in the area.

Originally posted by RadeFox

Change Environment is good, but its too, um, simple...not enough to hang your suspension of disbelief on.

 

Adding in a Force Wall, even a 1/1 or 2/2, give the players a point of reference for WHY its warm and dry inside. Also, any good explorer will be quick to point out, that the ability to make the walls opaque is a nice feature, especially if the local environment is full of flashing light bugs, or heavy storms.

Is a Force Wall impermeable? Air gets in (or you'd suffocate), so water should leak through a typical force wall as well. And it's not really insulated. The Change Environment covers both off anyway.

And it's warm and dry inside because it's surrounded by a wall of force. It's not a Force Wall (mechanic), but it is a force wall (SFX).

Originally posted by RadeFox

Change Environment is good, but its too, um, simple...not enough to hang your suspension of disbelief on.

 

Adding in a Force Wall, even a 1/1 or 2/2, give the players a point of reference for WHY its warm and dry inside. Also, any good explorer will be quick to point out, that the ability to make the walls opaque is a nice feature, especially if the local environment is full of flashing light bugs, or heavy storms.

 

Another thing to keep in mind, is that many things other then simple vermin might wander by in the night. Having a decent force wall in place could well mean the difference between life and death if a local carnivore happens upon you.

 

In old Traveller, Scouts often worked ALONE. So the ability to have a small force wall hut (I'd offer a 4/4 or 6/6 military/scout issue version) would be a highly sought commodity. The defense of the force wall, just as highly prized by solitary scouts and prospectors, on those lonely worlds filled with unknown and likely hostile critters.

I wouldn't add the force wall to keep bugs out - I think the change environment is adequate. For personal defense during the night, rather than just comfort, the force wall makes sense.

Of course, isn't the force wall visible, audible and detectable by one other sense? Essentially, you are choosing defense at the cost of being more noticable, unless you pump up the cost and make that Wall invisible (except to sight - who cares if it's opaque - that was the idea).

Getting long - Part II

Originally posted by caris

Well, you see, I don’t see where there is an expanded class “anythingâ€. I see an expanded class “any type of beingâ€, which is a fine distinction. Even at the +1 class level, I still rule that you are limited to generic types and not unique types. You could summon a dog, a demon, or a robot. You would not be summoning a randomly selected dog, demon, or robot from all in existence.

I agree with the game mechanic - "any type of being" is basically generic. My disagreement is whether +1 "specific being" should mean "only that one specific being may ever be summoned" or "you may choose to summon any specific being within your available class". In my view, to be a +1 advantage, the ability should be "You may select any Summonee desired from your available class within your maximum point total". Perhaps this is only a duplicate of the original (Green Lantern making a power ring lion, for example). Perhaps (and this is a power that should be examined carefully and easily abused) it is a magic spell that summone the real person. "Good evening, Mr. Blair."

You’re right, Duplication can generate a follower quite nicely, when you apply a +1 advantage for the duplicate not being identical. You can do it with the lesser levels of the advantage, depending on how much like your character you want your follower to be, but it is a trade off I can live with.

A completely different duplicate of a 350 point character costs 140 points. The duplicate costs no END to create, but takes a full phase to create, and another to recombine (IIRC). If the duplicate dies, your points are lost.

Let's use Summon instead. Start at 70 points so I can Summon the "duplicate" to begin with. Make him slavishly loyal, because (like my duplicate) he's under my control. That's +1. It's a "Specific Person", so that's another +1. There are some other differences (time to create/combine duplicate; END cost for Summon), but let's assume these balance out.

If "Only this specific person" costs +1, it costs 210 points as a Summon, or 140 for Duplication. If "Specific person" and "can only summon this one specific person" balance out to +0, it costs 140 - exactly the same as Duplication. This seems reasonable to me, since it creates exactly the same effect.

I seriously think you are underestimating the benefits of bringing you that follower. Since there are no mechanical limits that inherently prevent summoning, except the summoner being subject to an adjustment power. You have a way to instantly rescue the follower from pretty much anything. Heck, just as an exercise, try building the teleport and EDM that you would need to build for a follower to come to your character the way Summons allows them to. You also have the ability to apply limitations to the cost of the follower.

Assuming a 70 point follower, you have 70 points to work with under my logic (the +1 advantage to make the Summoned being slavishly loyal, or to make him a duplicate), or 140 points under your model. Teleport with Trigger ("When I snap my fingers, you will return")? Slap it in a multipower starting with ordinary teleport and, say, 16x noncombat, and work your way down through various Megascale options, add an EDM slot, and I think you'll find it can be done for 70 points, remembering that it only works on one person (that's got to be a -2 limitation).

Yeah, but if I have Summon “Mutated four-arm monstrosities†or “super powered beingsâ€, can I keep using and dispelling the Summon, until Grond appears for my team to pummel away on?

Which is why "select a specific person" should be a very carefully examined advantage. If I can ONLY summon grond, I can only beat him up so many times. Yeah, I took Grond off the streets, but I've got no real points left to be effective against anyone else.

Note that, even if one accepts the "Summon brings a randomly selected real person", structure, the odds of getting the specific one you're looking for from the pool is infinitissimal. My example (try again for someone with the knowledge) assumed knowledge fairly common in the class, such that getting someone who has this knowledge is pretty likely. Getting the guy who built the artifact in question? Clearly you'd need "specific person" for that!

Originally posted by caris

Now your interpretation is valid and there is certainly a strong case for it, but it is not the only interpretation. My interpretation is that inherently Summon is for “generic†creatures and beings. It is used to bring in your basic “mooksâ€, “thugsâ€, and “cannon fodderâ€.

I think we're on the same page here - if I choose to Summon Dogs, I set the point value of my dog. I probably pick a combat-effectove dog, so I don't get a miniature french poodle. I get basically the same dog every time - color, gender, etc. vary, but it has more or less the same stats (note that the rules envision only very minor statistical changes for basic Summons, with examnples topping out at shifting half a dozen character points).

If you want something more interesting than a “faceless drone†as an individual you have to apply the Specific Being Advantage, and accept that you only get one. (e.g. In my game you could Summon “dogs†and you would get a different “generic†dog each time, but that dog would never (or so rarely as to be as good as) be your pet collie “Lassieâ€, even though she is built on the appropriate number of points. Alternatively, you could choose to pay the +1 Advantage to be able to Summon “Lassieâ€, but you would never get any other dog.)

The issue to me is "Lassie" versus "generic dog". If you paid to summon a 75 point dog, and Lassie is a 150 point dog, you will NEVER get Lassie - you didn't pay the points. If you paid the points to summon a 150 point dog, what is the game advantage to getting the same color, gender, etc. dog every time ("Lassie")? I don't see this as worth double the points. Note that the dog is no friendlier - you must pay for "amicable", regardless of whether you summon a specific being or a generic "dog".

The I’ll keep summoning the “Spirits of Dead Playwrights†until I get William Shakespeare, so we can ask him who really wrote his plays stunt just does not fit with my interpretation of the rules. Summon, can not do that inherently. You will never get from basic summoning someone or something that has a value in and of itself.

I think it twists the rules greatly - I would suggest that, to get "William Shakespeare" specifically of all those possibilities merits an advantage. However, if you can summon generic spirits of the dead (rather than a specific spirit of the dead), their knowledge should logically vary.

ASIDE: Why you would use Summon Spirit of the Dead instead of simulating this with a Knowledge skill bonus, maybe with some limitations, would be a good question. With the cost of a Summon, you could get a pretty good skill bonus.

[/b]Since inherently the “Spirits of Dead Wizards†are all unique individuals and not generic. The only way that I would allow you to use Summon the way you’ve been describing is with both the Expanded Class (at the +1 level) and the Specific Being advantage.[/b]

So presumably you think that this is worth three times the cost of "summon generic dead wizard". To me, the generic "Summon" gets basically the same generic character sheet every time. Room for customization is, as noted for the base power, very limited, if at all. To get more room for customization, you buy "expanded class" - now I can summon any type of dog, so some statistical variance is possible, but I get a generic dog of the species I choose. Moving up the charts to +1, I can summon a generic **anything** at +1. Summon Human? Sure. Summon Circus Ringmaster? I suppose - depends on SFX. Summon PT Barnum? No.

[/b] I would house rule that in conjunction those two advantages together could produce the results that you’ve been describing as the base effect of Summon. I would probably, let you get a limitation put on it for restricting it to a certain group, and the fact that you get a random one each time you use the power, but the Active Cost and END should be higher do to the potential abuse of the power.[/b]

If I'm reading you right, we're getting a lot closer to the same page here. I would buy Summon, +1 advantage "Anything" expanded class, +1 "specific person". Now I can basically choose anyone I want (within my point limit, of course). Then I limit the potential choices to a specific group and a random choice, so my actual cost comes back into line.

However, the actual rule is "Specific being" means you summon one, and only one, specific being. My position at the outaset is that we restrict the generic "spirits of dead wizards" to all having identical stats (and, absent an advantage, they would) and "you get one knowledge roll and that's it" (which should also be the case - guven the spirit serves little other purpose, he's likely got a high enough roll that most knowledge is a given anyway). That said, however, I fail to see how saying "I only summon one dead wizard - he has the same stats as the generic dead wizard, but his name is "Wilberforce", he has a thick scottish brogue, he has a long white braided beard and always wears a kilt" means the power should be doubled in cost. It's probably no more limiting - how do you kill someone who's already dead anyway? But it also carries no benefits whatsoever - it's a special effect. As such, it should not carry an extra cost.

Similarly, I believe the advantages and drawbacks of "Only summon this specific being" instead of "summon a generic being of this type" balance out - assuming the "specific being" has the same point cost, is as amicable, etc., as the "generic being". As such, ot should carry no extra cost. However, the ability to select between specific beings at will DOES carry a significant advantage, and is worth the +1 advantage. I also agree with FREd that the ability should generally be restricted in some fashion - "rescue the Princess" is a lot easier when I say "No Problem - Summon the Princess", but that's a matter of game construct and genre (eg. "no telepathy because it's a mystery campaign"), not point balance.

At least you can change the quote. The system assumes my birthday is December 31, 1969.

Is Hero trying to tell me I'm too old for this game?

I'm pretty sure 5th Ed covers this, but I don't have the books with me. IIRC, the suggestion was that, for helpful powers, this would reduce the value by 1/4 or something.

Given harming instead of healing is a serious result, as a GM I'd be inclined to let it go and say the character gets full value for the side effect.

Another thought - you could build it as a Base (pretty cheap for the size and DEF you're probably looking for) and define it as "summoned" by the wristband (or as a vehicle, since you can move it about - but the shelter itself doesn't move, so I'd call it Summon Base). Bases have opaque walls, and keep the rain and bugs out.

To clarify the mechanics, you would pay the full cost of tjhe base (ie compite base, divide by 5) and pay END for the Summon. Basically, the "portability" of the base offsets the END cost. You could buy the Summon no end. You can also make it pretty cheap with Extra time ("Just pull the switch, and in only a minute, you've got a complete shelter")

I'd just go without the Force Wall. Change Environment should be able to keep those inside dry and vermin-free anyway.

How big a deal is the fact the exterior is opaque? I can't see in, you can't see out. It's not like it will see combat use. If you want hard walls (and even 4/4 seems pretty hard - 4 resistant DEF is a failry tough object), then you need the Force Wall.

Originally posted by Markdoc

In general, carrying two guns or two swords is just special effect: Chow Yun Fat is just as effective with one gun as two - or even four.

The two problems raised are "use both at once to double your attacks" and "extra guns = extra charges". The easy solution is to rule that the 5 point duplicate is a backup only. Charges are for all duplicates in aggregate, and you can't use more than one at a time. If you wantb these extra advantages, buy the weapon again at full cost or simulate it with other powers (eg. autofire, extra dice only to spread and hit two targets, what have you).

Yes, letting players have two guns that have to be disarmed gives them a minor edge over the guy with one, just as being able to shoot energy beams from your two hands rather than just your eyes does. But in general, the difference is so small that it's pointless to quibble over.

And if it's truly only a backup weapon, only used when the "main weapon" is disarmed, fair enough. At this point, maybe a 5 point cost is reasonable on the basis he only has to draw the new weapon and he's back in action.

If he want to carry 6, then he needs to buy OIF instead of OAF. At that point who cares if he carries 6 or 26?

He can have an unlimited number - just make them "restrainable" instead of "focus". Same cost as OIF, so no real difference. One could argue he always has one, so even after being strip searched, he still has guns somewhere on his person, but SFX justify the removal of the weapons in such a case (ie they have been "restrained" until you can get them back).

So now we have three schools of thought:

- 5 points for a duplicate device is too cheap

- 5 points for a duplicate device is just right

- 5 points for a duplicate device is too much

Of course, which view one takes depends on what one believes the duplicate device can be used for.

Originally posted by D-Man

It really doesn't matter which way you want to say it. The meaning of the text is clear enough. Universal only applies to items the GM rules are mundane.

As GamePhil notes, the rule is "mundane generally means universal", not "universal generally means mundane".

Adopting your interpretation deals with the "lend it to my friends" problem, but how many "genre bits" do we lose? Lazer's unique lazer pistol can't be grabbed by the hero and fired - it's not mundane. Now we know why Armadillo and Ankylosaur found power armor in storage - it wouldn't work for anyone else.

Magic rings, wands, swords, etc. work only for the person who paid the points for them, which pretty much blows the ability to "loot the bodies", or recover and use ancient mystic artifacts two staples of fantasy games.

Originally posted by GamePhil

 

You paid to have spare suits. You did not pay to have suits to hand out to your compatriots. There are other ways to do this in the system. Ways which may be used without regard to Foci, and ways which are valid, in that they are designed for this use.

[/b]

Yet, based on the initial comments at the start of the thread, it is perfectly legitimate to pay 5 points to have a SPARE gun/sword/what have you, and use both your "pruimary" and your "spare" weapon at the same time, a maneuver which cannot be equalled at the same point effectiveness by a character who does not have a focus for his powers, and consequently paid more points.

One character buys a 12d6 Energy Blast. 0 END (90 points). The other buys a 12d6 Laser Blast, 64 charges, OAF Gun (45 points), pays 5 points for a duplicate gun and buys up the two weapon fighting skills, plus some levels to offset the penalties.

The first character gets to fire once in a phase. The second gets to fire twice per phase, with no CV penalties, and, even after the skills, doubtless spent less points.

Granted, the second guy can "only" do this for 64 phases - how often do you fire off 64 attacks at full power before your charges can recover? He can be disarmed, but he's still getting a huge point break. To get the effect of a second shot per phase, my naturally powered character needs to double his speed. Another EB won't do it - his multi-power attack can only hit one target. Autofire doesn't work - he's restricted in target choice - and would carry an even greater cost by doubling his "0 end".

The argument that "a competent GM would disallow abuses" is reasonable, but one could also argue "a competent GM" should be able to run the game without the benefits of any rules whatsoever - he can just make up fair and equitable rulings on the fly (or just make characters with no point-based system). Then we don't need to pay points for powers at all.

The rule should either be that the duplicate devices cannot be used simultaneously ever (you want two attacks, buy them the expensive way), or that all duplicate devices can be used - after all, the character paid the points. Obviously, my call is the former - to spend 15 points for 4 duplicate Power Armor suits and then outfit all your teammates just means every superteam will have Captain Armorer or be squashed by those that do.

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

The only major problem so far is that because it summer time in RL, and half my group are college students and the other half have occasional vacation plans and what not, the attendence from week to week has been very topsy turvy, making it difficult to run storylines that span game sessions, so Im a little concerned about starting this arc as it will necessitate leaving MC...The in-game timing indicates to do it now, but the RL timing indicates to hold off on it until the summer is over and the player roster stabalizes......Hrmm...

Time for a miniseries or flashback adventure...

Originally posted by Derek Hiemforth

I view this mechanic similarly to MegaScale. Meaning, I think it's most useful for allowing GMs to build masterminds and such without throwing ludicrous numbers of points at them. For players, there is the potential for abuse, and the GM must be prepared to Just Say No if necessary.

How many people have worried about point balancing a master villain? How many have statted out the cost of his base (perhaps its an entire universe)? How about making the charismatic group leader pay for those devoted followers, his teammates? The robot guards? The killer satellite?

This never gets statted out into the villain's powers - most GM's balance their villains based on effectiveness and chalk up the extras needed to move the game forward as

plot device - plus infinity limitation"

Originally posted by GamePhil

None whatsoever, because I'd only allow it as long as this is done under some extreme circumstances. If they're going to be going off like this on a regular basis, they have to buy it like good characters. The rule is for "carrying lots of back ups or having a fleet of vehicles", not a cheap way to increase the power of the entire group.

 

Plus, when a specific rule goes out of its way to point out, "At the GM's option" (see page 309), a statement that is true of all rules, you ignore it at your own risk.

But I paid my points to have extra suits, didn't I? Either having extra suits is possible, or it isn't. Either they are universal, or they are not. If the character had instead invested the extra points in a slow fade rate Aid, would he be prevented from beefing up the other characters?

The difference is that 10 or 15 points don't buy much aid. And they shouldn't buy an extra four suits of powered armor either.

[Now, the same character also has no right to complain when the extra suits get stolen and used against the team - you got the point break for OIF, and making the foci universal was YOUR choice!]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

I agree that +1 1/2 would be too much, however IMO the +3/4 Advantage for switching between unusual defenses is not unreasonable.

A STUN drain costs 10 points per d6. An ego blast costs 10 points per d6. Why should it cost an extra 7.5 (or 5) points per d6 to have them act against the other defense?

Might as well just make that Drain "based on ECV", and get the ability to target against mental defense with no range modifiers for a paltry 2.5 points per die more.

If the cost of making an ordinary EB work against Flash, Mental or Power defense is no different, regardless of which defense is chosen, how is it hugely advantageous to switch the defenses?

Yes, Sunglass Man will actually be blinded by my Flash vs Mental Defense, but not a single Egoist will. Who is it more advantageous to blind? Probably the guy whose powers all have range = line of sight!

Re: What am I missing... the 5th ED Champions...

Originally posted by chariot

First of all, this is not an attack.

Second, I am a fan. I've been playing Champions since before Champions 2 (I still have the original hex map and blue dice that came with the boxed set). I own so many 4th Ed and earlier supplements, I could open a store...

Me too - but I have the black dice. The itty bitty blue ones were a great disappointment to another player who bought later.

I bought the 5th Ed rules, and enjoyed them. I haven't played them yet, but I have seen many improvements. I bought Champions, glad that Aaron was back. Now I know Aaron is far more 4 Color than I am... but did anyone else think too much of Champions bordered on corny?

I have only had CU and CKC for a few days... and maybe the problem is that I have not given any of this new material enough time; but I'm not impressed. When I took them out of the box and saw that CU was roughly 1/2 the size of CKC, I said: something just doesn't seem right here.[/b]

Haven't detail read them, but I've yet to find a supers supplement that can't be adapted (or use even a single character "out of the box" with no customizing). Take what you like, change what you don't. Prefer the old background? Use the old background!

I wish to re-iterate. I am a long-time fan and supporter of Hero in all its incarnations (how many out there own the 6 Issue mini-series featuring the original Champions and DEMON?).

Yup...and Flare. And Marksman.

And I am not trying to disparage the work done by DOJ. Do I need to give it more time, and look at it all more closely? Or, perhaps, is this just not my flavor of Champions?

At the risk of being flamed, I prefer it greatly to Dark Champions. Years ago, I overheard the comment "I prefer more realistic heroes...like the Punisher". Never quite got over that...

How many times has he suffered life threatening wounds? Broken bones with no treatment? In unhygeinic conditions? Yet he stays in peak physical condition nonetheless...

Originally posted by Col. Orange

Interesting, I would have thought vs. Mental DEF rather than Power DEF would be a -0 Limitation. In our games Mental DEF is more common than Pow DEF (it seems easier to justify - "I've trained with telepaths to sheild my mind" vs. "I'm from Krypton"). Plus Mental DEF gets a bonus of one fifth your EGO, so you end up with more DEF for your points.

My general rule (which is not the official rule, I know) is that switching between unusual defenses (Power, Mental and Flash) is not an advantage. It's silly to have to pay +1 1/2 to make your Flash work against mental or power defense. If it fits the conception, pick a different unusual defense.

An energy blast acts against PD or ED - your choice. Why should unusual attacks carry an extreme cost to change to a different unusual defense?

Originally posted by Blue

Haven't had this issue yet. But here's how I'd ajudicate it in my campaign...

• You can get a "backup" weapon for 5 pts.
  
• You still only have the same total number of charges. In other words, if you had 8 charges, that's 8 charges between all copies of the weapon. That way if you lose one/have it stolen you still have a few charges in the other one, and if you use all your charges you can't just run to the other gun to get reloads.
  
• You wouldn't get any extra attacks as a result of having a second weapon. I don't need a rationale, I'm the GM, and it's unbalancing to allow someone to do multiple full attacks. You want more attacks, buy up your SPD.

Short and sweet.

I always like to add "This rule also applies to NPC's" This makes it a bit clearer that, if you persuade me to change my rule, it can and will be used against you.

Originally posted by D-Man

Managing things like power armor is pretty easy. You want 2 suits of power armor? Okay, Iron man's got plenty. You can wear one at a time. It takes at least an extra phase to get out of one, and then an extra phase to get into the other enjoy. If the player pulls the "but my armor has two blaster gauntlets" routine the GM merely needs to rule that the armor is one focus.

I'll buy four. By the way, they're Universal Foci...my buddies will wear the other three today. No abuse there, right? They each spent 3 points to buy "Drive Armored Suit" skill!

Originally posted by caris

I think part of the problem is differing assumptions over the base nature of the power, and the nature of the fact that you are summoning from a “group†of something. Personally, I assume that at the base level that the group has to be so homogenized that there is no in game benefit from pulling the “I Summon this one, and if he doesn’t know what I want I’ll Dispel him and Summon another trick.†That if you are building a base generic Summon power with no advantages on it and the characters summoned with it have any KS’s, a single KS roll pretty much covers all uses of Summon for that question. Also you would never just through “random†chance get the specific individual you needed to answer a question. To be exact if there were such a chance of that happening, than the group is inherently too diverse to qualify for the base level of Summon.

Restricting to one knowledge roll seems reasonable. But this means I either pay +1/4 to broaden the group (or up to +1 to summon anything I want) and get to keep chaning my choice until I get my answer, or pay +1 for Specific being and get one roll only. Where's the advantage?

For me the potential for abusive Summon constructs is too great if I were to allow a base “Summon Spirits of Dead Wizards†as anything other than an expanded class. I might even require it to have both Specific Individuals and expanded class, but that would depend on a lot of factors.

See, there's the problem in a nutshell - there is no "specific individuals" advantage. There is only "Specific Individual" - you get this one guy, and that's it. If +1 allowed you to choose any specific individual from your chosen class, this would be worth the points. In fact, maybe the advantage should be based on the class available.

No expanded class = no ability to summon specific individuals - they're generic. "Summon anything" means a further +1 advantage to select the specific "anything" rather than a random generic "whatever you summoned".

I think the putting the advantage on Summon specific being is to discourage attempts to effectively build a follower with an unlimited teleport/EDM, and/or with limitations. Summon specific being has the potential to be extremely powerful, since it can be used to create a teleport/EDM usable as an attack effect that is virtually limitless in range and does not require an attack roll.

Duplication can generate the follower effect quite nicely. All Summon really does is bring you a follower, assuming it's amicable - which is an advantage.

I think the bigger issue is the "I summon Grond here now that we're all ready to Push and fire on where he will appear" construct - one which should clearly be disallowed anyway, not simply "Oh, I paid the +1 advantage so I can do this."

Originally posted by DoItHTH

1) summon generic being (+0)

 

2) summon specific being who comes in the same condition he was at last time only modfied by normal healing (+0)

 

3) summon specific being who comes ressurected and fully healed (+1)

 

Do these not sound balanced? So then is the full heal implied in the advantage?

But "Summon generic creature" pretty much means it always shows up fully healed, so I'm paying +1 to get a specific wolf that comes wounded, instead of a generic creature with exactly the same stats. This is where the problem lies.