Zed-F

Re: Eurostar vs Sentinels But do they fight like terrorists in a Silver Age game, or terrorists in an Iron Age game?

Re: Three Heroes to Save the Universe Soulbarb doesn't generally handle problems on this scale and doesn't have a team or the global-level contacts to form one. She's a street-level heroine for the most part; her contacts are strictly local and mostly around her own power level. She would call the problem in to UNTIL or PRIMUS, anonymously if possible, and let them worry about forming the team; she's not suited to go. The only way she would be going is if she had to go *right now* with whoever she could get her hands on... then it depends on whoever happens to be around in her campaign city. The only person she's worked with on a regular basis is her boyfriend Nocturne, so him for certain; otherwise, it's catch as catch can. Sylph doesn't consider herself suitable to lead a hero team; she's too shy and retiring, and is more of a support player than a front-line fighter. She would either contact UNTIL and let them form a hero team, or contact Speedzone and let him arrange things.

Re: OK, I don't understand Continuous Officially, no. In theory, you could make a house rule to that effect. However, beware of advantage stacking unbalancing your construct. Also beware of geometrically escalating END costs, and note that Continuous+Reduced END is a way to quickly wind up in cheese territory if you are not careful about balancing. The KA is an Instant power. It does not have any further effect once the first application is resolved -- what Continuous does is let you automatically repeat applications at suitable intervals (once per phase), in this case as long as the Grab is maintained. So you apply one KA, then you apply the next KA, then you apply the next KA on successive phases. Each KA is only applied once, because there is no maintained or duration effect. You only get geometric progressions if you apply Continuous to a power that already has a maintained effect or an effect that otherwise has a duration. Sure, but you wouldn't build that as a Damage Shield. That's just a regular Continuous attack. Moreover, I don't think you can legally build that as a Hand Attack, since he obviously can't use his STR to boost it if his arm is elsewhere. I think that might be defined as a Continuous physical EB with a limitation 'Must Follow Grab'. Even better might be TK with Limited Effect and Must Follow Grab.

Re: OK, I don't understand Continuous Constant and Continuous are not exactly the same. When applied to an Instant power with no duration effects like a regular EB, Continuous mimics that power being Constant, but as soon as duration effects enter the picture you can spot the difference. Continuous means you don't need to keep spending attack actions to keep hitting someone with a power. If I hit you with a regular 2d6 Suppress, I can hit you with it again to make it a 2d6+2d6 Suppress, but I have to roll to hit and spend my attack action to do it. With a Continuous attack, if I hit you with the first suppress, I will automatically hit you again in following rounds with another suppress, and another, and another, until I turn off the power, am Stunned, lose LOS, etc. Damage shields don't keep on working after the target stops touching the shield -- no range takes priority over continuous. You can use triggers to build a damage shield instead if you want; IIRC it works out the same (a +1 advantage.)

Re: WWYCD - with a twist!: Imbalance of Power Soulbarb might commiserate, depending on how charitable she's feeling toward the individual in question. Whether she does or not, though, she'll try to get as much detail as she can out of the alleged victim. Getting his or her side of the story nailed down up front will be important to figuring out whether that's actually what's happening here. She would not take an accusation of that nature at face value, pretty much no matter who'd said it, and especially not if she was considering doing something about it. She's got the soul of a detective -- first thing she would do is check for corroborating evidence. In a world with supers, there's any number of ways in which there could be more to this situation than meets the eye. If she found evidence that someone was being mistreated (either the alleged victim or the alleged abuser) then she would act to get that person arrested (if the wronged party would be willing to press charges) or socially humiliated by exposing their conduct (if not.) Sylph is much more trusting and compassionate. The first thing she would do is provide any physical healing that was necessary. Next she would probably want to get all parties involved together to talk things out and see where things are going wrong. While she has no training as a relationship counselor, and is as likely to screw up in that capacity as she is to do good, she's at least earnest and sincere in wanting to make sure everything turns out for the best, which might help. In either case, gender, powerset, or anything else doesn't really enter into the picture. Soulbarb is too cautious about jumping to conclusions to allow herself to be prejudiced one way or another, whereas Sylph is too open and trusting to want to believe the worst of anyone until she witnesses the truth of it firsthand.

Re: VPPs and Active Point Limits I would use the pool reserve size for the AP limit. However, your GM may want to assign additional limitations on the size of the pool, for instance if you can put limitations on your pool powers to increase the number of real points worth of powers you can squeeze into it.

Re: [Review] CU: News Of The World (+ Long Argument On MPA's & Frameworks) Doesn't really work as a general case though. I could have a MP defined as a utility belt and use two different gadgets on it, one with each hand, for instance. Or, even more simply, I might have two guns.

Re: [Review] CU: News Of The World (+ Long Argument On MPA's & Frameworks) I also thought that there was a prohibition against MPAing attacks from separate frameworks in some FAQ or another. So, if I have two separate 60-pt MPs each containing an attack power, I can MPA those two attacks together, but if I have one 120-pt MP with two 60 AP attack powers in it, I can't MPA those two attack powers together? How exactly does that make sense?

Re: Green Goblin Jet Boarding Questions. OIFs can be breakable. Making it a MP doesn't preclude the focus from breaking -- an MP counts as one power for the breaking focus rules and is likely to be the most expensive power on the focus, and thus the first lost. You just have to get past the focus's defenses, which can be easy with the right powers, depending on the board's construction. As far as whether it's expensive... depends on whether it's the character's main shtick, or just an ancillary vehicle that sometimes gets used. In GG's case it's like power armour -- he's almost never willingly without it in combat. Vehicles are perks, and tend to get taken out of the picture more often.

Re: [Review] CU: News Of The World (+ Long Argument On MPA's & Frameworks) I guess I'd have preferred to see a new face join Eurostar, if it needed a power boost. One that was a bit less of a loose cannon. Different strokes, I suppose.

Re: [Review] CU: News Of The World (+ Long Argument On MPA's & Frameworks) I wonder why they thought re-adding Pantera was needed? Never really liked the character to begin with...

Re: [Review] CU: News Of The World (+ Long Argument On MPA's & Frameworks) EDIT: Ok, I had a counter-point to make, but since people are tired of that discussion, never mind. Wait, I'll put it in spoiler tags so you don't have to read it if you don't want.

Re: [book Review] Champions Universe: News Of The World To point out why some of the rules (specifically, the rules disallowing MPA'ed attacks from ECs) are written as they are. Power defense does nothing against NNDs unless the NND is stopped by power defense, in which case it's stopped regardless of whether it's 1d6 or 20d6. Nope, it came up because someone thought it wouldn't be a bad idea to allow MPAs of attacks in ECs.

Re: [book Review] Champions Universe: News Of The World If I buy a 20d6 NND in an EC, I will either need to be paying for a whack of 200 AP powers in my EC, and paying 100 real points for the EC and 100 real points for each power, or I will be paying most of that 200 points straight up over the (probably much) smaller EC discount. Either way I'll be spending roughly 200 points for the EC and for the power, plus whatever I spend on other powers. If I buy 20 1d6 NNDs, in the same EC, I will spend 5 points for each die of my NND, and 5 for the EC framework cost, for a total of 105. Even if you buy no other slots, you get the NND for half cost. And every additional slot that's 10 AP or less is just gravy. If you don't like limiting yourself to 10 AP slots, make it 20 or 40 and redistribute the NND dice accordingly to match the slot size... the point remains that you're getting a much better break on the power than you would if you bought it straight as a 20d6 NND within an EC, despite it being no different mechanically. Does that make it any clearer for you? This is why the idea of MPA'ing different attack slots in an EC is more problematic than the same for an MP -- you can get a lot of attack power going on the cheap by using several smaller attacks, if you aren't going up against PD or ED. With an MP, you're limited by the size of the reserve. If you have a 90 AP MP reserve, and allow MPs to MPA within the MP, it doesn't much matter if you have three 3d6 NNDs or one 9d6 one, you've got the same attack potential either way. I'm not suggesting the 20x1d6 construct should be allowed, but it does illustrate the point. The same applies to your own example, by the way.

Re: [book Review] Champions Universe: News Of The World Can I have 20 different 1d6 NNDs in my EC and fire them all at once too? I don't know that I agree with the idea that two different 30 AP attack powers in a 60 AP multipower cannot be used together... but in the case of ECs at least, it's well known that the more slots in an EC that can be used at once, the greater the value for the points the EC becomes. Having an EC that allows multiple attacks to be used simultaneously merely encourages this and exacerbates the EC's 'free points' reputation.

Re: OIF: Items of Opportunity The blaster could put a defensive force field in his slot, assuming the GM said that level of defense was acceptable given caps and so forth. But then, he'd be giving up his attack to do it. By the standard rules, if you let bricks have tricks without paying for an MP reserve, then the brick can have an extra defensive power active without giving up their normal STR-based attack, very cheaply. If you make the brick pay for an MP reserve, they then have paid for the AP of the defensive power as well as the flexibility of having that slot. You could of course house-rule away the brick's ability to attack in such a circumstance, which is what I believe your solution under the 'treat STR as an MP' rubric would be. I'll reiterate that if you wanted to do this sort of stuff as a house rule for your game that would be one thing, and you could probably make it work, but it's not well-suited as a core rule. I personally don't have a problem with the idea that brick tricks can sometimes add to power. I wouldn't think it would be useful to restrict things so that brick tricks can never add to power, by default. After all, there's nothing to say that an EB can't buy a straight attack power, and a separate MP, and then MPA the straight attack power with an MP slot. Then the EB would (loosely speaking) behave similarly to a brick with an MP of brick tricks in terms of total power level.

Re: OIF: Items of Opportunity The 'problem' here is that your experience does not match what the game system allows, and most likely it doesn't match many other people's playing experience. As I outlined in my previous post, it is perfectly legal and in many games encouraged, for brick tricks to directly impact power level. In your own game, as a house rule, could you allow certain kinds of brick tricks without having to pay for an MP reserve? Probably. In fact, the easiest way to do it would probably be simply to have the brick(s) in question buy a power skill, and then be lenient when it comes to using that power skill. But to have brick tricks as a general rule be so cheap to buy? As a core rule? Not so much.

Re: OIF: Items of Opportunity First off, lay off on the rhetoric. I could say much the same about your argument, with better justification. So, let's not go there, and concentrate on brass tacks, ok? Here is what you asked: Here is a generic EB's MP: 60 Fire powers (60 pt MP reserve) 6 1) Firebolt: 12d6 EB 6 2) Searing Heat: 6d6 EB, NND 6 3) Fireball: 8d6 EB, Explosion 6 4) Smoke: 6" Darkness Now the brick could buy +50 STR to get a 60 STR. This will give him a 12d6 attack. Your question is why he can't then buy brick tricks at 1/10 the cost. Let's see what happens. 50 +50 STR (60 STR total) 0 +10 PD, +10 REC, +25 STUN, +10" leap, +throwing/lifting capacity, etc. 0 Brick Tricks (based off 60 STR so a 60 pt MP reserve) 3 1) Enhanced Push: +60 STR, No Figured, x2 END Cost 6 2) Now THAT's a Knife: 3d6+1 HKA, Range Based on STR (6 1/2d6 w/ STR) 4 3) Shockwave Stomp: 8d6 HA Explosive Cone (16d6 EX with STR) 6 4) Brace for Impact: 50% Resistant Physical and Energy Damage Reduction A lot of brick tricks are also ways to increase the brick's combat potential by leveraging his existing STR, or other heightened figured characteristics acquired as a result of buying STR. So, by allowing brick tricks to be purchased without first purchasing an MP reserve, you allow the brick to double or more than double his attack and/or defense power, very inexpensively indeed. Exactly how is this a good idea? A much better balanced version that still fits under a 60 AP cap would be to have the brick spend 20 or 30 points on his STR to get a 30 or 40, and then require him to buy a MP for his brick tricks, at full cost, exactly as the rules currently allow: 20 +20 STR (30 STR total) 0 +4 PD, +4 REC, +10 STUN, +4" leap, +throwing/lifting capacity, etc. 31 Brick Tricks (31 AP reserve) 1 1) Enhanced Push: +30 STR, No Figured, x2 END Cost 3 2) Now THAT's a Knife: 1 1/2d6 HKA, Range Based on STR (3d6+1 w/ STR) 2 3) Shockwave Stomp: 4d6 HA Explosive Cone (8d6 w/ STR) 3 4) Brace for Impact: 25% Resistant Physical and Energy Damage Reduction This way the brick STILL winds up cheaper than the EB -- he has more figured stats from his higher base STR and cheaper multipower slots -- but he's not completely out of the EB's ballpark as far as combat power level achieved for points spent goes. His tradeoff is that he's not got quite as much raw STR and figureds as a pure STR brick, and is not quite as good at special attacks that don't leverage his STR compared to the EB... but then, if he wants to be as powerful and flexible as an EB in that regard, he can always opt to spend the points on a bigger MP reserve (staying within any AP cap, of course.) Or, if he'd rather just go with more raw STR and figured characteristics, and skip the MP full of tricks, that option is still there. Anyway you slice it, though, if you don't require points to be spent on the MP reserve for tricks to be added, you will wind up with double-and-more powerful bricks relative to every other archetype.

Re: OIF: Items of Opportunity But then he paid points for that power skill.

Re: Flying Grab Rule Questions I believe your move ends at the target hex with any FMove maneuver like Charge, Passing Throw, or Flying Grab. The only difference between a FMove maneuver and a regular maneuver is that you may make a full move to reach the target. AFAIK Flying Grab is NOT mechanically similar to a Grab-By in that respect. Not sure what you are asking. With Flying Grab, you would grab someone on the first phase, then move and release on a second phase. By the rules, nothing special happens to the victim -- it's as if he'd never moved at all. You'd have to use a Throw maneuver, build a power to simulate what happens when you grab someone and slam them into something in this fashion, or rely on GM interpretation and arbitration to determine the effects. See above. You need to build a power to properly simulate this, or rely on a Throw maneuver.

Re: Green Goblin Jet Boarding Questions. You can get most of the abilities shown in the movie with Flight OIF, as I described. The only thing you can't do with Flight OIF is have the hoverboard perform independent actions that will take more than one phase to accomplish.

Re: Transform - Do We Need It? For some things, depending on genre, you don't need transform. If you're using disabling rules, a person can be blinded with a called shot to the eyes if you can do enough BOD damage to them. As far as how much it costs goes, I don't have an issue with it. Permanently blinding someone isn't as effective in most genres as simply killing them, either. You're giving up 'power' in exchange to get exactly the effect you want. It's up to you to define the effect you want, within what's reasonable for your SFX, and the effect you want defines how much 'power' you have to give up. If you really want 'power' then just go with a BOD Drain or a RKA. There's nothing that says I can't have a 'Transform: Person to Frog' spell and a 'Drain BOD: Flesh to Stone' spell. The former leaves the target alive in a state I specify. The latter simply kills them with a nifty SFX.

Re: OIF: Items of Opportunity Because there's no reason a brick can't buy a MP of brick tricks just like the EB has a MP of blasts... Because there's no reason that MP of brick tricks can't have attacks in it that increase the raw DCs the brick is able to throw... I mean, seriously, there are enough people who think STR is too cheap as it is. Divorcing brick tricks from the standard power costing rules would be asking for trouble, not to mention opening a huge can of worms for how to balance such a change against other archetypes. Should Mentalists suddenly start getting more stuff for free just because they bought a bunch of EGO?

Re: OIF: Items of Opportunity Now you've got it. And if you put it in a Brick Tricks framework of some sort (usually a MP) then any individual trick won't cost much. You can also throw some reasonable limits on it such as RSR and OIF: Object of Opportunity (if all your brick tricks happen to require objects.)

Re: OIF: Items of Opportunity I originally thought that might have been it, although I didn't consider that to be funny. More sick, actually. But then I saw the following at the end of your post: And I thought, there had to be more to it than that. The drunk is by no means obviously a brick, nor is that any kind of a brick trick. All in all, it came across as a rather twisted non-sequitur.