Hyper-Man

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? I did not build Sectional Man's Lack of Weakness with an activate roll, I built it as part of the focus that only affects the defenses it provides to the character. By default the Hit Location IS its activate roll. nope, I am not doing anything that is a house rule effect. read the FAQ's: Q: If a power only functions when another power makes its Activation Roll, does the second power qualify for a Linked Limitation (for the standard or reduced value)? A: Yes. A power that can work only when another power succeeds with an Activation Roll should take Linked as per normal — the character makes the roll once for the base power, and if he succeeds the Linked power activates as well. The Linked power should not have an Activation Roll of its own unless the character needs to make a second, separate, roll to activate it when it’s possible to do so. Q: How long does it take to make an Activation Roll? A: Typically it’s a Zero-Phase Action, but in some cases (such as when a character checks to see if a Defense Power protects him from an attack) it’s an Action that takes no time. Sectional Man's helmet has Lack of Weakness Linked to the Armor protection it provides. Nothing in the rules state that you can't put that limitation on that power. It is NOT a house rule! Activate Man's similar special effect helmet has an activate roll on a defensive power. the FAQ clearly states that the activate roll is not made until an attack is made. NOT a house rule!

Re: Lack of Power coverage Interresting construction. As a player I like it. As a GM I would look at and see that it forces me to define EVERYTHING in the environment. For a control freak type of GM this may not be a bad thing. Appreciate the post!

Re: Help? Need power to counter shapeshift I am not that familiar with the cellular level advantage. Does it state that it would fool even a blood test like in the movie "The Thing"? If so it appears that the only way to discriminate short of the suggested Dispell method would be Mental Power based. But IF a blood test could work all you need to do is build a focus with all the appropriate detects, analizes and such with the addition of the Rapid Sense to the appropriate level that you want.

Re: The cranky thread You gotta think of it as Karma in action dude. I don't like not being able to give out more rep after I've 'spent' my 5 for the day. I feel like I am forgetting to give it to deserving posts.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations?

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? Again, let me repeat! I am not against the use of Find Weakness, only its use in COMBINATION with Hit Location rules!! The FAQ makes no mention of sectional defenses so explain how the following example makes sense WITHOUT A HOUSE RULE: Sectional Man forgot his suit today. All he has with him is his Helmet that provides 8 resistant defenses, hardened and 8 points lack of weakness only for the locations it defends (-1.5). A hit location roll MUST be made before FW. Are you saying that I can't take a limitation on Lack of Weakness? There is no mention of it in the FAQ. Let's use the same example without using Hit Location rules: Activate Man's Helmet provides 8 defense hardened and 8 points lack of weakness and ALL OF IT is on an activate roll (8-?, 6-, 5- the number does not matter). Regardless of whether FWman chooses to target resistant or normal defenses, the determinaton of whether my helmet works against his roll can't be determined until MY activate roll is made. Yes this sounds clunky but is perfectly legal within current rules, but forcing me to make a hit location roll for an attack that has not even been fired yet does not make sense. Every other defense allows for the use of activate rolls with no problem. Are you now going to argue that Lack of Weakness is the lone exception to this?

Re: Lack of Power coverage Your post is a little confusing. Are you advocating a different mechanic? If so I would hope that it is at least as simple in its USE which has far more gameplay effect than its descripion. But even if that requirement is met you run the risk of GURPifying the rules so they no longer form a toolkit for any effect to be created.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? What exactly is the special effect of your cover every possible angle version Find Weakness then exactly? If you could describe a specific special effect you would have convinced me already. But you appear to be avoiding any attempt at doing this. Also, Have you actually thought through a combat? FWMan decides he is going to attack Sectional Man. FWMan makes his FW roll. This takes place before he has even made an attack roll let alone a Hit location roll. What SPECIFIC DEFENSE is he halving? Oh wait, we have to wait until we roll Hit location before we answer that. Let's add another wrinkle. Let's make Sectional Man's armor have built in Lack of weakness for its defenses (it has hardened too)., The special effect is quality workmanship and materials, no magical conveyance to the rest of his defenses. Now, if we repeat the combat example above we can't even determine if the FW roll is a sucess until we roll to hit or roll hit location? This make absolutely no sense whatever!! However if I change the attack to Armor Piercing it is simple to half any defenses that are not hardened and use the hardened portion normally!

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? I am looking at your choice of words to describe each effect and in each case the specific choice already implies a special effect that I have described. opponent moves: This has already been covered. force field: This would not usually apply to the sectional defenses test case I have presented since I have never heard of sectional a sectional coverage Force Field, but I suppose you could buy FF with sectional coverage but then the argument is exactly the same as the orginal test case I have presented. weak spots: If the word spot does not equate to location in your mind I don't know what else I can possibly say?!? If the sectional and overall weakness are 2 different things. if you allow sectional defenses you can't find an overall weakness in those defenses since they are by definition NOT uniform overall. If you define the characters ability as an enhancement to his attack that makes his attack reduce what ever defenses it applies to you then have the Armor Piercing advantage! This can easily be built as a naked advantage and applied to different attacks. Let me restate for the record once again. I am not opposed to the use of Find Weakness in games. I am only against using it in a game that already uses Hit locations. Edit: to further my earlier suggestion that Find Weakness might better be described as a Super-Skill take a look at this post on another thread: http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=340454&postcount=27 I am not 100% positive that there is not a special effect description that meets the test case but no one has put one forth yet.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? The point or challenge to posters on this thread that I have made and have yet to see a valid argument against is the following: Without the use of some house rule tied to the Hit Location rules it is not possible to explain the use of Find Weakness AND Hit Location rules at the same time vs. a target with sectional defenses when not actually making a targeted shot. I have still not seen any description of an effect that deals with this without using a house rule to explain it.

Re: Lack of Power coverage Invulnerability is a very slippery thing. In the comics it should be called virtually invulnerable/indestructable since the 2 best examples of it: Captain America's Shield and Superman practically define it but both can and have been affected by very powerfull opponents. That should settle the issue since any player wanting to play a character more powerful than Superman or tougher that Cap's shield should be laughed at! I really like the way you summed up the 'Power Defense' problem. I agree it needs to have a more concrete effect that it is tied to but like Dustraven points out later in the thread, that implies magic. I think a more apt description that would fit in with existing UMA rules would be to describe it as a type of Karma or Chi'. Heck, call it the Force. That way a mechanic is explained for magical AND non-magical items to have the potential for some defense depending on the Karma of the area the material was mined or the individual(s) who crafted the item. As a figured characteristic it probably needs to be a blend of 2 primaries like CON and INT taking the sum of each divided by 10. with rounding this would give a normal 2 defense. One result of applying figured stats for Power and Ego defense is that it would require retro-fitting any NND attacks with those powers as a defense, maybe just a minimum 10-15 points but then that jumps over to the realm of AVLD so it would be tricky in either case.

Re: Lack of Power coverage

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? I do appreciate your interest and I appologize to you ahead of time and anyone else I might be offending but... I have already shown the flaw in a similar special effect description. I think you are about the 3rd or 4th person who has tried to make a power out of the Analyze Style skill which can give OCV/DCV bonuses which in turn could be used towards hit location penalties or increasing weapon damage directly. The important point is that increasing the energy of an attack and lowering the defenses against damage from the attack are two completely seperate things. Nothing about that special effect demands the use of Find Weakness if Hit Location rules are already being used. Please read the entire thread.

Re: Lack of Power coverage The problem I see with avoiding the use of Transform is that what other mechanic are you going to use as a defense against any replacement/NEW power? Shrinking usable against others describes the effect but not the defense. Transform has a very clear and well worked out mechanic for Power Defense and Body. Unless a NEW power description has a simpler but still fair mechanic for defense against the power there is no reason to not just use Transform instead.

Hi Steve, I was just curious and confused by your recent response on this subject. The following example was given: You answered: I think your ruling might be too restrictive. To illustrate this better from here on I will describe Armor Piercing, Penetrating and Indirect all as Flanking Advantages. I am also going to slightly change or add possible clarification to the wording of the example reference to the rule in question on page 77 of FREd: A single level of Hardened will not stop both a Flanking Advantage and an additional potentially different Flanking Advantage bought for a single Power - that requires two levels of Hardened. A character who buys Hardened defenses can define which particular Flanking advantage he will be affected by first in this situation when buys each level of Hardened. By the logic of your answer to the first post on this subject It appears that a player needs to define exactly which specific Flanking Advantage that just 1 level of Hardened will stop. If the player defines his Hardened as stopping Armor Piercing and is then instead hit by a Penetrating Attack his Hardened has no effect. As far as I currently understand the rules this is NOT the case so why are you changing the logic when looking at 2 potentially different Flanking Advantages when a defender has 2 levels of Hardened? I always thought that the process of defining which Flanking Advantage will affect a character is only relevant if the # of Flanking Advantages is greater than the # of levels of Hardened that the defender has. I doubt that I am the only Herophile that has made this assumption either. Is this assumption incorrect? Please clarify in either case. Please don't take this as an attempt to change the existing rules. I just want to better understand the reasoning behind them. As always, your quick responses are appreciated. And thanks for temporarily sacrificing some of your personal stash of Hero Dice so that I could get my order (they just arrived yesterday!).

Re: What Fantasy/Sci-Fi book have you just finished? Please rate it... This definitely qualifies for the almost category: The Flying Sorcerers with David Gerold? I am a confirmed Niven Nut. The only ones I have not read are the most recent ones in the 'Magic Goes Away' series, Burning City, and Rainbow Mars from the weird timetraveling/alternate universe stories (convergent series?! i can't remember the name!) I am really looking forward to the followup to Inferno!

Re: What Fantasy/Sci-Fi book have you just finished? Please rate it... Another Niven fan!! Have you read any of his other non-Known Space collaborations?

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? I find it amusing the way you say that you disagree with me but still have not presented an alternative that does not require house-rules to handle FW+HL+sectional defenses. There is no official rule on this so any change you advocate to handle this is in effect asking for the official rules to be changed as well. I also disagree with your reasoning on the history of FW in the game system as a skill->talent->power when other 'old original' powers have been eliminated do to redundancy in the rules already (regeneration, instant change). Lack of Weakness is cheap but it is all or nothing, either you have some or you don't. Conversly, everything about the description of Find Weakness screams combat manuever. It takes time and has an 'activate roll' built in. No other 'powers' (besides movement) has a minimum time to use or roll to activate in its core descripion like this which further supports the argument that it is not a core 'power' but is instead a construct like a talent or superskill. It was changed from a Talent to Power because it was recognized as being too 'powerfull' for just anyone to get. It was deceivingly powerfull because GM's did not compare it to having at least +8 penalty skill levels vs. hit locations. Most GM's at first glance would probably refuse the +8 vs HL before they disallow Find Weakness even though the first example is 4 points cheaper! Let me repeat one more time, I am not opposed to the use of Find Weakness as a simplified replacement for Hit Location rules. As current rules stand it is a "?" power though so it does require as much consideration by a GM as the alternate constructs that I have already suggested. Imagine if it didn't even have the "?": Find Weakness is considered a power so it might be argued by a player that he should be able to spend up to the active point cap of the game. 60 points worth of FW in a 350 campaign is a 19- roll which is probably at least a 50/50 shot against anyone short of Dr. Destroyer! Just 2 lucky rolls against him and you have potential for a really wacked combat! If Find Weakness is allowed in a game that already uses Hit Locations it at least demands "stop sign" status and rigorous house rules. But of course, there is nothing "oficial" to this effect yet. Hopefully 6th ed. will address this in a few years.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? Your argument against drains or suppress is flawed since Find Weakness does not allow you to affect the CON characteristic. Keeping track of the defense dropped from a drain or suppress will require EXACTLY the same amount of bookeeping as Find Weakness since it also only benifits the character that makes the FW roll. Please read all my posts in this thread. I am not saying that Find Weakness is abusive. In a game that has characters like Superman you will not see Hit Location rules being used as this mechanic is usually considered tedius in combats where high speeds and uniform natural defenses are the norm and not the exception. What I am saying is: that as written in the rules, WITHOUT use of any house rule, the use of Find Weakness AND Hit Locations together is abusive and/or broken. The argument that defenses for bricks is abusive goes against one of the major themes presented in FREd: That defenses should always be cheaper than the effect they defend against. Requiring a 'brick-themed' character to buy lack of weakness in a game that already uses Hit Locations is just as abusive as allowing a NND attack that is only stopped by force fields in a street level heroic game that otherwise only uses 'real' technology like flack jackets and no exotic powers. My argument against using Hit Location rules in conjunction with NON-HOUSERULED Find Weakness boils down to this: No one has yet presented a valid effect that REQUIRES this combination to explain it effectively instead of using other existing power effects like Drains/Suppress or Armor Piercing (possibly as a naked advantage) OR use of existing skill rules like Penalty Skill levels towards Hit Location. Every single effect presented so far on this thread can be and HAS been explained by one of these effects. And EVERY argument presented so far has required a house rule to deal with sectional defenses which makes my case.

Re: Shrinking + IPE = Desolid (Sort of . . .) I like it! One question though. I am wondering if the IPE part of this construct should be split up the way examples have shown for a gun that fires an 'x-ray' laser (the gun itself is visible but the attack it fires is invisible). For this version of the shrinking mechanic, the first level of IPE would hide the fact that you are shrinking but not that you are immaterial in some sense. Others can see when the power is active (objects and EB's sometimes pass through you) but you can still affect them. This could be a fun lesson for other GM's to retrain any game mechanic players in their games that would naturally underestimate said characters offensive punch when he 'appears' to be desolidified but is instead using this variant.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations?

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER I wonder if zornwil is as shameless in everything else he does? (besides post to this board!)

Re: What's the Benefit of Having Same Power Twice? I have to agree with this line of reasoning too. let's say the equipment is not a weapon but instead a force field projector. Like the NND example the effect of having more than one of these would also stack. I think the easiest solution would be to say that any multiples of equipment purchased for every 5 points are only backups and as such cannot be used at the same time as the primary. This still allows IronMan and Batman to have backup armor and utility belts but not get any combat benifit from it which I don't think the rule was ever intended to do in the first place anyway.

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations?

Re: Do you allow Find Weakness in games using Hit Locations? By saying that the rules for Find Weakness should be adjusted to account for Hit Locations you are in effect agreeing with my earlier statement in this thread that they are both just 2 different ways of describing the same effect which again is double dipping. With regard to cumulative curses I totally disagree. A Drain or Suppress makes far more sense since a curse implies some type of magic and "magic" effects are usually defended by power defense not lack of weakness. A limitation can be applied to state the effect is only versus the caster of the curse. Remember the first appearance of Find Weakness in the rules was as a Skill, the fact that it is now considered a Power is only a reflection of the desire to build Super-Skills. This is no different than the ability to by 5 point skill levels with limitations.