eepjr24

So your build was built for Heroic level, that is fine. There are other power levels and ways to build things. And your build above would not be particularly effective in wide variety of situations for a few reasons: 1. As written, it only affects PD and ED, not Resistant Protection (Armor / Force Field in 4e/5e). It would affect PD and ED bought to be resistant. 2. It has no effect on clothes or any type of worn defense that is not PD or ED. So if their clothing or armor provided Damage Negation, Damage Reduction or Absorption they would be unaffected. 3. Since PD and ED are defensive powers, you'll only get about 1.5 points on average per phase (3 every other phase) assuming it is not bought as resistant. If it is bought resistant, it is 1 point per phase on average. If it has other advantages, that goes even lower. So really, it's an interesting concept for reducing PD and ED, but doesn't really do much for the original stated SFX. Might be better to use something like a PRE Drain combined with a PRE attack to accomplish it?

My guess would be Surbrook if anyone has. I did not see it there, but you might ask him. - E

Not sure what your point is here. That it would be an EGO+30 effect? I agree with that statement. That it would be expensive? Probably, but I am not looking for something cheap, just different ideas of how to model it. Perhaps you could clarify your meaning? - E

Interesting. Like I expected, folks came up with some I had not thought of and some I had. I love this system for that. My originals were: 1. Mind Control 2. Mental Illusions 3. Transform person to person with Complication: Phys Lim: All things covering the body itch, cannot abide being covered. 4. 1 pip RKA, NND (Naked, Fully sealed environment, PD Resistant Protection that costs endurance), Does Body I had not considered a Drain, I don't think that would work for clothes since it was an PD/ED drain essentially. Transforming the clothes is an interesting idea. I'll have to give that one some thought. I think Mister E was being sarcastic, but I suppose we could interpret that as a large amount of PRE plus a presence attack to remove your clothes. Touch images are a mess generally, but this might be a corner case where they could work. Since you are essentially overlaying the image on top of a person, there are no worries about things passing through it, etc. Nice one. Keep them up if you come up with something different. =) - E

I am thinking about a spell that causes you to want to remove whatever you are wearing (clothes, armor, etc) due to itching and discomfort. How would you model that? I can think of 3 possible paths, but before I muddy the waters I would like to hear what others think is best. Thoughts? - E

No, it is explicit for the 1 point PSL. The 3 point says "+1 to offset a specific negative OCV modifier with all attacks", so that would be a targeting penalty with ANY weapon and any maneuver. 1 point is limited to a single maneuver, single weapon. 2 point is any 3 maneuvers or small group (swords, crossbows, axes, etc). So a 3 point level bought "Only for Strike" and "Single Weapon" would essentially be a 1 point PSL. That's why I build them from 3 point with limitations, because the 1 point you are getting the limitations on a prefigured real points value. This does happen other places in Hero, like limits on talents or perks or other prebuilt effects, but I prefer to avoid it in player constructions because of the larger potential for abuse. If the player wants to use these for other maneuvers I would build it like this: 11 RP - OPSL: Targeting +8 (24 Active Points), OAF: Magical Sword (-1), Real Weapon (-1/4) And if he decides the Focus is unbreakable, I would ditch the Real Weapon and make it a straight 12 RP. If he wants / needs it to be cheaper for some reason I would suggest he look to some other limitations, maybe Extra Time: Full Phase or Costs End might be appropriate if it takes effort to use the PSL's. - E

Edit to add quote, since others posted between me starting and finishing my post. =) That is certainly a valid interpretation. You can also look to 6e1 pg 84 as HM quoted above. 1 point PSL's are already fairly limited in their original build, so I prefer to start form the 3 point ones: 7 RP - OPSL: Targeting +8 (24 Active Points), OAF: Vorpal Sword (-1), Real Weapon (-1/4), Only for Strike (-1) This makes it more explicit exactly what the limitations are. You can modify to taste, Only for Strike could easily be -1 1/2 (either -1 or -1 1/2 would take the PSL from 3 to 1 alone), which would make the final cost 6, same as yours. The player might want to note that in BOTH (mine and yours) versions they are explicitly offsetting the penalties for one maneuver, so these do not apply if they try to use the sword with a haymaker, martial arts, for a move by, move through, etc etc etc. You can be as lenient in that respect as you choose, but per RAW it is only paying for a single one. - E

6e2 pg 61, emphasis mine: I think this intended to signify both that it ends a characters phase and that they cannot use another attack that round before or after the dodge. - E

Independent does not exist in 6e. But to your point, it is still a focus. If it is a Universal focus, it will be used against the character at some point. If it is Personal, it will be removed somehow for some period. And I don't just allow wily nilly creation of magic items and they generally don't turn out to be exactly what the player is after unless they are duplicating a proven and tested design. - E

Yeah, I will caution folks who use it that a limitation they put on their characters will get used in the campaign and that they should consider that. Same with Complications, they are one of the easiest plot devices for me. - E

Yes, they can be added, but I generally would put some restrictions on them as a GM. First I would probably make them use 3 point PSL's and second I would likely cap them at half the OCV cap for the campaign ground rules. So if the OCV cap is 10, at most 5 PSL unless previously approved. - E

FYI, and this is per questions I had to Steve in the Rules forum on 6e, it often makes more sense to buy raw OCV and DCV when the effect is set than it does to buy CSL. So dodge would be 15 points, to start, not 30. If you apply a basic limitations: 5 RP: +3 DCV (15 Active Points); Counts as attack action (-1), Cannot be used except when executing the "Dodge" maneuver (-1) Other folks can argue about the value of the limitations, I am just spitballing to get something out there. - E

Assuming you are using 4e or 5e? Sure, that is a better justification than many I have seen. And more so if the drain is electrical or technology based. - E

Hrm. You are correct. Too many versions floating around in my head. So apparently you can take Unified Power in addition to the MP discount, either on the pool, the slots or both. In that case, the numbers above for MP are still valid, just without the deduction for unified powers. Which means it is a higher reduction for swapping slots. I also am not seeing any restriction in 6e on putting skills in an MP. You might not even need a new framework if you use that. Build the maneuvers as fixed slots and most of your problems are solved, point wise, except for the initial buy in. That may in fact be why Aaron set up MA with a 10 point minimum, to help spread the cost of the pool over maneuvers. - E

EC was replaced by Unified Power in my mind, which limits for special effects that are drained as a group. Multipower is drainable as a group, as is VPP. Multipower provides a larger variety of uses than Unified Power and a variable limitation that is more character specific. But generally it is a version of lockout for pool. Fixed slots lock out more points at a time by providing less flexibility for both a specific power and the overall pool. Variable less so for the opposite reasons. An all variable slot, 3 power, 60 AP multipower is about an overall -1 limitation (96 RP for 180 AP), so it looks like the "sharing" aspect of an MP is worth about -3/4 (this varies somewhat on how many powers are bought, the mix, etc). The same MP bought all fixed would run 78 RP for 180 AP, about a -1.25 total limitation. Given those numbers there is something intrinsic about the pool purchase that provides an additional -1/4 to -1/2 in addition to the lockout value. VPP has too many variables for me to go into during my lunch break. LOL. - E

Okay, so what would the boilerplate limitations be then? If there are none, why does the framework give a discount at all? Why not just use Unified Powers? - E

I am open to discussing any of them. Having a unique style does not mean you have no style though. It can still be learned by perceptive onlookers or those who have fought him in the past. And it certainly does have it's basis in boxing and probably escrima, with elements from other things (capoeira, kung fu, kali, etc). As to the powers, you could not model Daredevil for instance without having some powers in the mix. He certainly has an NND and strike based flashes for instance. - E

I think that is a decent start place, maybe as high as -1/2 if folks figure out things that make it more limiting that I can currently imagine. Limitations of the framework: Must be related to a martial arts style. Minimum purchase of N points. Style is identifiable to other practitioners or knowledgeable persons. Only usable via purchased weapon elements (one element is free). Limited pool (Cannot contain X powers)

+2 CSL per DC. Minimum CSL that can be used this way is the 3 point level (small group). Limitation Only To Increase Damage (-½) is applied per 6e1 p447. That yields a real cost of 4 points per DC, assuming no other modifiers. - E

Just FYI, I moved most of the discussion on this thread over to the main hero discussion. I will update here on occasion as well. All class, race, and background templates are complete. So are Invoations and feats. will move back to spells again shortly. Most of the content can be reached here: http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/Contributions/eepjr24/Default.aspx If you need the links for invocations or feats, please check the other thread. - E

My point here was not that there are not solutions. My point was you need to think about it ahead of time. That solution works fine. So do a myriad of others, like adjusting the encumberance rules to make it necessary to buy additional strength if you want to wear heavy armor all the time. Or by introducing long term end as a normal outcome of casting. Thus at low levels when mages can cast few spells they may wear armor, but then shed it as they want to cast more because of the LTE. Or you can use fiat and say metal interferes with magic in some way. Or make VPP's have a side effect when you use them in armor. Anyway, just figure out what works for your campaign / magic system / player base and run with it.

With money bought items you also need to watch out for overlapping defenses, mages with 6 resistant defenses in magic and another 4-6 in mundane armor are going to be common unless there are some kind of restrictions on it. Decide up front what level and role you want magic to play and balance it across different play styles so that it is a level playing field. - E

Does not matter to me. I like the style thematically and if someone finds it fun to do I am onboard with that as long as it is not unbalancing. Which I don't find with either multiple attack or with autofire. Combined attacks have not come up in the context of heroic level games for me, so no comment there. I was just trying to figure out what Massey was trying to say, aside from the sarcasm. - E

Not sure what your point is with Musashi, unless you are trying to establish the difficulty and rarity of two weapon use in RL? The fact that for some part of his life he employed two weapons is pretty much overshadowed by the fact that he dueled over 60 times without defeat (almost always with a bokuto, not a traditional sword much less two). - E

Sure, always looking for feedback. Feel free to ask questions, explaining some of this will help me see things I might have missed during the conversions. - E