sporeworld

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

...green lanterns don't seem to lend rings to another and a loen ring usually searches a new wielder. Plus the next GL tends to be a sector away. And we already got to the bottom of the Focus Limitation anyway.

So: "IIF (Green Lantern Ring of opportunity; -1/4)" on his "Green Energy Manipulation" Multipower.

 

That brings up an interesting point. In cases where the Focus (magical or otherwise) is deemed to be inhabited or controlled by "an intelligence", is THAT intelligence vulnerable to Mental or EGO attacks...? Or Mind Control...? Or PRE attacks? Or even just simple persuasion...?

Re: Summon: Am I missing Something Here...?

On the topic of handling Shrinking benefits WITHOUT buying the problematic "Shrinking Always On" power, someone suggested Change Environment, which I finally read up on, and I think therein lies the solution. Fascinating reading - all kinds of fun new power combinations popping to mind...

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

Great responses!

Q: Concerning your (Ghost-Angel's) comment about how hard it would be to grab glasses - while logical, doesn't that circumvent the standard "Grab-Move-Neutralizes-focus) approach? If the focus presents (very?) challenging CV modifiers, shouldn't that diminish the value of the focus in the first place? Otherwise, players would have all kinds of bead-of-rice sized foci. Silly kids...

Variable Advantage you (Christopher) described seems like the cure-all. "...OAF (Bow) or No Range (-1/4)".

So, assuming the disarm OAF and "holds on to Focus during Knockback" stuff is on point, someone COULD have an OAF with a FURTHER limitation (goes flying from hand and rendered useless by ANY Knockback). Minus....? More than -1...?

This is SOOOOO off from the original point, but the glasses thing has me thinking the solution might be:

Physical Complication: Poor Eye Sight (Minor effect: -3 to perception and range combat rolls).

+3 to Perception Rolls (Corrective Lenses): OAF (-1), goes flying from head after suffering Knockback (-1/2).

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

Fantasy Campaigns usually call that equipment and don't care at all how it's built.

 

But normally, OAF is far more accurate and accepted a build than OIF "gun of opportunity" for the actual gun. Trick shots (like a stand alone Autofire) are usually "OIF Gun Of Opportunity", not the gun itself.

OK- so this has me back to calling the Trick Shot Multipower Pool carrying an "OAF limitation - must posses usable High-Velocity Projectile Weapon", or something more cleverly phrased. So much to consider.

Related Question: Could someone limit points of OCV as "Must be wearing corrective lenses" to represent someone who can't see squat without their glasses? If so, could this be applied to INT for purposes of Perception Rolls? Or Missile Deflection, etc?

The player in question couldn't grab just anyone's glasses. They'd need to be at or near their prescription level.

AND, if all this is possible, how can it be reverse engineered to represent "Targeting Glasses"...? For that matter, what about contacts (IIF)...? And in the case of glasses as a Focus, could standard knockback be enough to knock them off...?

(Sorry for the many, many questions...)

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

There are Durable and Indestructable Foci. Even if the GL Ring wasn't one of those (which it probably would be) pointing out that they can break something that they specifically said they want to simply take away/disarm (and may want to use themselves) is not exactly helpful.

Right. And as I understand it; a ring that can only be used by the one character, is indestructible, irreplaceable and unremoveable, isn't really a legitimate focus at all. Correct?

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

That is just a bunch of Target Size Penalty Skill Level. The ring is a (destructible) Focus.

 

 

By raw that would be "OIF, (Firearm of Opportunity; -1/2)".

Inacessible, because it is hard to totally deprive him of this power. Just taking away his one gun/sword isn't enough, you have to clear the entire area of guns/swords. And he could use all his guns for this trick.

Blast, OIF of Opportinity is often used for "Throwing Master" abilities.

.

Makes sense. But how does that play out in Fantasy campaigns. A power with broad sword (OAF), and the sword breaksm then he borrows a friend's similar Broad sword. Are they both generally OIF of Opportunity, or is this built all wrong, and should be, say "+1d6 RKA, Only Usable with Broadswords". I'm a little confused. Presumably, Green Lantern doesn't need A ring, he needs THE ring. I also get confused about a power with charges, representing the ammo FOR the gun, not necessarily IN the gun. If a Green ARROW guy gets his bow broken, he can still hurl his arrows, or possibly take his arch enemy's bow and use his arrows with that, right? So how does THAT math out...? Are the arrows OAF? Is there some kind of 0 Range, must be hurled, thrown or launched?

Re: How to build: Star Trek Style Pain Rays

Nice! Thanks!

Re: The Sincerest Form Of Flatery...

Amen!

In the old days, we used to swap GM's every week, and there were necessary objectives - add 2 new characters (usually villains), solve the cliffhanger, end with your own, etc. Almost every week, the rotated GM would pick up one of the newly introduced characters as his/her PC for the following week(s).

We eventually did the thing where everyone rotated characters randomly, and tried to play them in the style they'd been presented - adding a little flavor here and there. That was also a blast.

Thanks for reminding me.

Re: How to build: Star Trek Style Pain Rays

You could also link it to a PRE drain. The pain makes the victim fearful and more willing to cooperate.

Yeah - That's probably the subject of my next question... :-)

Re: How to build: Star Trek Style Pain Rays

All good suggestions. The Change Environment is interesting - I'll have to read up on it.

I read up on the Mental Entangle, and that would probably work, too. Especially, with a linked drain or suppress, as noted. Maybe to the same power fighting the Entangle...?

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

It's worth a note that a group of powers using the same Focus do not have to be part of a Power Pool at all. Or Unified. Or Linked.

.

Yup. In the case of the helmet, I COULD call each lens Linked and Locked Out, so I'd only use them one at a time. But the Multipower Framework is thematically correct, cheaper and allows for many more slots of different lenses - all usable ONLY one at a time (so, no telescopic infared vision... but that WOULD be pretty cool!).

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

Lockout Limitation.

 

Might work

 

QM

Ah! Forgot about that one. Brings up a question: Can someone have a Lockout Limitation on a power in a Pool related to ANOTHER power in the SAME pool...? This WOULD be a limitation, if the powers were, say, both 40 Active Points, and the Pool was at LEAST 80 points. Right?

A common effect in Star Trek is a baddie who hits the officers with "pain" that brings them to their knees.

How can I emulate this, without reducing someone's stun or draining their Strength?

I thought maybe some kind of Surpress END - something where they'd need to burn STUN to keep going? That, coupled with a basic Mind Blast - allowing a mentalist to maybe resist the pain part (Ego Def) but still have to physically push past the restraint of No End...?

Also, how can I "bring them to their knees"...? Could this be part of draining their END to zero...? Does it cost END to hold themselves up? Or, would I need some kind of STR drain, too? Or, asked another way, how can I have an attack that does KnockBack ONLY cause Knock DOWN...?

Thanks (in advance)!

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

As for shooting the Green Lanterns Ring off his hand - well, if the Lantern bought that ring IIF, he'll be wasting a whole Turn "shooting" and I would ask what SFX are involved in him doing that. If the GL didn't even bother using a Focus Limitation he'll soon find out what a useless endeavor that action was...

This idea is from a 70's comic where Green Arrow shot off Green Lantern's ring. We were thinking with enough skill at manipulating the trajectory of, say a bullet... the character could shoot off someone's ear ring, lock a car door, turn off a Doomsday machine, etc. Ha! Maybe even disarm a bomb!

I'm guessing the definition of "Obvious Accessible" would mean you could immediately determine it's remove-ability, right? So ring on finger SHOULD be removable... with the right approach.

To that end, we looked at STR Usable at Range, Telekinesis (Fine Manipulation) and Stretching as possible approaches, with TK leading the way. It would need serious (SERIOUS) explaining every time, but some things would be conceivable. Shoot a can ON a post - easy. Shoot the can OFF the post - potentially trickier.

Example: Opponent wears a Magneto-like helmet. We're imagining something from "Shoot 'Em Up" where the ability to fire several rounds to maneuver the person and helmet into position, allows for a final well-placed shot to pop off the helmet (it happened to me in Paintball - no lie - guy unloaded his smg from the foxhole below and shot my face mask and goggles about 3" out of position - what a mess).

The effect SHOULD be "unbelievable", since it really kind of IS. TK guidance is responsible, NOT the bullet, gun or the shooter's "aim".

Re: Question: Multipower with Dissimilar Foci

Yup. I think we're on track. It's weird having multiple Power Pools, but it themes better as common energy (PSI) concentrated into distinct effects.

It'll probably look more like this:

MultiPower Pool 1: PSI ENCOUNTER SUIT - IIF

Personal PSI Powers flow through the suit (Ghost from StarCraft)

Invisibility OR Teleport OR a few other odds and ends.

MultiPower Pool #2: HELMET - IAF

Utility Powers - Targeting Lenses OR Flash Defense Lenses OR Heat Vision Lenses, etc

MultiPower Pool #3: TARGETING EFFECTS (maybe OAF?)

This is a natural PSI power to alter the trajectory pre-selected (OAF) moving objects (thrown rocks, bullets, etc).

Physical Damage OR RKA OR Modified Telekinesis (shooting a gun out of someone's hand), etc.

The helmet COULD just be Unified powers, or use the Linked modifier. But we prefer the mechanic of the pool.

We had a Supreme Court style discussion over the exact mechanics of a Focus Situation. Hoping you can shed some light.

A guy has a Multipower described as A-MAZING accuracy with weapons - the kind that can do ridiculous things (like shoot Green Lanterns ring off his hand). But other effects of bullets are in there as well (RKA for example).

We said this power MUST have a focus - ideally a gun (or bullet). To keep this simple and themed, we said it had to be a gun. So, OAF, replaceable.

The same character also has a Combat Suit (think Ghost from StarCraft) that includes a Targeting Helmet that improves Accuracy. This is ALSO considered an Obvious Focus - but in this case, Inobvious Accessible.

Now, let's say that player builds a MultiPower defined as "Combat Suit", with the Pool points limited "IIF". Then, he uniquely defines each slot (OAF for gun, IIF for suite, IAF for helmet). How does this play out when the SLOTS are differently focused from the Pool.

Example: Combat Suit Multipower: Inobvious Inaccessible Focus (the Suit Itself).

Targeting Helmet: +OCV as an IAF.

Gun: RKA as an OAF.

We're thinking that IF the Suit (IIF) is damaged, the pool is inaccessible. The helmet won't work, and neither will the targeting. But the fact that the gun (or any gun) SHOULD still work, seems to suggest that the power simply doesn't belong in THAT Power Pool. OR, the GameMaster can rule that if the suit is inert, the character can get text book damage for whatever that class of handgun can manage, and that's it.

Am I close...?

Re: Summon: Am I missing Something Here...?

You cannot "Dismiss" a Summon, you have to use a task to send it back. You cannot do so if it's K.O. or Controlled.

Hmm. I like that. Kinda fun. I wonder if someone can use Images to conjure a fake Summoner and issues orders to the imps. Would they know the difference?

Re: Question: Knockback / Stomp Question

To clarify, we want it to look just like it does in the video game - a stomp from directly above - crushing the target (maybe into the ground?). So, if we need to half move to above, and then crash/kick/move-through or whatever. We were even thinking it might function more like a Haymaker, with a little time delay between the jump and the slam.

One of our players made a Super Mario mimic. He wanted to leap up and come crashing down on the bad guy. How should we have calculated the damage to the attack, with 12d6 STR vs bad guy, with 8 Knockback. He had a 12m leap.

Since the bad guys is getting pounded into the ground, does the Knockback stack?

Should it be treated like a Move Through?

Would he be pounded into the ground, or bounce off a few hexes?

If his STR had "Increased Knockback", how would THAT contribute to the KB damage calculated?

As always, your input is appreciated.

Re: Summon: Am I missing Something Here...?

OK - good points. I didn't want to stray too much into deconstructing one kind of Summoned being - I wanted to review the power as a whole, which I think we've done. It's situational in any case, and problematic in large numbers. I think it could be fun, but time consuming. At this point, with the limitations we've discussed, I don't think anyone will want to use it. Which is fine with me.

As for the account stuff, where I really see it play out ,is when a largely unmodified character is in combat against someone like Armadillo. His armor (OIF) offers a point savings almost across the board that has very little drawback in the conflict. The players can SAY they're happy for staying in character/concept, but they may be MAKING that statement on behalf of an unconscious character.

The shrinking thing is minor. Still seems to me like it should be Shrinking Always On.

And the Linked/Unified situation, I don't see a conflict with some powers having both. The Unified expresses a theme or special effect (a bit like the old Elemental Control thing), and Linked, as I have it, means the little powers only work when the big one is on at full power.

Re: Summon: Am I missing Something Here...?

Onepossible way to limit Summoning is that when you summon new creatures' date=' you instantly cancel any commands you have given to the existing ones.[/quote']

 

Yup. Or that repeated uses cancels any remaining imps, and summons all new ones (instead of just beefing the number back up to max).

Re: Summon: Am I missing Something Here...?

Dodgy build opinion noted.

As for shrinking, why is that way preferable? How exactly do you buy down your weight and increase your Knockback? Isn't "Shrinking: Always On" the sensible approach? Also, how do make yourself less percievable?

Re: Duck Flavored Killing Attack

Peeking Duck - Precognition???

Peeking Duck - Precognition???

Qwak - Healing

Cluster Duck - Area Effect Attack

QM

These 3 made my day!

Re: Summon: Am I missing Something Here...?

No Targeting is questionable on an AoE Damage Shield power. Personally I'd make him buy Affects Physical World on the Clinging as well as the STR. Some people disagree' date=' but for characters that are always smaller or larger than standard I'd require you to buy the Characteristics andPowers to represent that (using the Size Template) as per RAW oRules As Written), not Always On Shrinking, especially since this is a Summoned being and that would have cost ramifications. It may not be against the rules but IMO having a whole bunch of Attack Power with Affects Physical World Linke to an Always on Desolidification seems really cheesy. How often will his Desolidification get forcibly turned off? Remember, a Limitation the does not limit the Power is not worth any points. Further more, what is the SFX justification? His attacks can already affect the physical world, why would forcing his body to physically manifest (with a Drain or Suppress) suddenly make them not work? He can burn any physical object as long as it cannot touch him, but if anything can touch him he can no longer interact with it? Seems illogical.[/quote']

 

Maybe. I'm still learning all the nuances of these rules.

 

The idea is EVERY aspect of this thing is a flaming, easily dispelled body. Not sure how to buy it, but I think a Drain to ANY of the Desolid, would shut off everything else. At that point, the chandelier build falls apart and the imp is un-summoned, and returns whence it came. I don't think a cup of water would do it, but like someone mentioned, a Fire Extinguisher (extremely common) would completely dispel the imps in one phase. That's the idea. Maybe even a Brick who bought the Hulk's Hand Clap maneuver would work, too.

 

Clinging/Str Affects Physical World is a decent call.

 

As for the cheese factor, I'm not really considering that for purposes of a reasoned discussion with my players. We're all accountants trying not to cheat on our taxes, but not leaving money on the table, either.

 

The other way to buy this would be with MASSIVE DCV additions to emulate a wispy, hard to target body (I've seen it used for Teleporting). That might even make more sense, as area effect powers, and maybe people with Growth might bypass that. Any other way to define a semisolid creature, besides maybe Damage Reduction (not currently allowed in our adventures).

Re: Question: Does TK Grab function like STR Grabs?

Thanks.