Mazeus Xenon

Re: STR Minimum I posted to Steve Long about this and he directed me to an FAQ - essentially the weapons were all build with a generic KA attack and assumed they all worked with strength, so the Lim applied. However, in the "Ultimate Weapon" (oh, okay...) he said he might address this better... So I got my answer - game creator bonus! (+2?)

Re: STR Minimum I don't want it to be a roll but a required characteristic. That way if someone is drained of INT they can't use or suffer a penalty to use their spell. And in regards to the bow - I full understand why extra STR won't help. I am just wondering why the "STR Does not add/subtract Damage" is a further limitation if the base power - like an RKA - doesn't benefit from a high STR anyway? All of the guns and bows and things in the core rules also apply this limitation but I don't fully get why it benefits as a limitation - nothing is actually being limited!

Okay Steve, question: Under the STR Minimum for equipment in Revised 5ED it says that the STR Min limitation can gain an additional -1/2 if the "Cannot Add/Subtract Damage" is applied. Makes perfect sense - I follow this just fine. What I don't get is how it applies as a limitation to a gun. A gun is built using an RKA, right? And an RKA can never benefit from a high STR score. So why would this qualify for a limitation? It seems like you get a 'free' -1/2 Limitation on all guns that way. Sure you suffer the OCV penalty but big deal - I would have suffered that anyway! Please explain as I am using a "Characteristic Minimum" in my game (spells req. an INT or EGO minimum, etc.) and I want to wrap my head around this one so I can potentially apply it to spells and abilities. Thanks!

Okay, I have my own variation of the "STR Min" limitation in my game - essentially any characteristic can be used. Those worth more points/+1 benefit from a higher Limitation than others. Regardless of that, I was wondering about the "Does not Add/Subtract Damage" limitation within STR Minimum. I know why it exists - no matter how much STR you have it won't do any more damage - but why is it applied to pistols and crossbows and the like? Aren't they built as an RKA, which would never benefit from a high STR anyway? What I am getting as would it sensible to apply an INT Minimum (my variation) to spell that is simply a temperature control and add the "Does Not Add/Subtract Damage"? Nothing directly adds to a Change Environment power but the same is true for an RKA yet it is applied anyway... (and I saw nothing in the book to cover this)

Re: Hitting Hex Variant What about linking a Negative Skill Level to penalize the Dive for Cover roll? 5 Negative Skill Levels to DEX (25pts) AoE (+1) Only to Reduce DFC Roll (-2), Linked to AoE (-1/2) Final Cost: 14pts, or about 3pts/-1 to the roll 5 Levels might be excessive (any 'typical' person would be at a 6- roll) but it would get the job done... And if you don't need the AoE on the Negative Skill Levels you can go crazy and get 10 Negative Skill Levels at the same cost!

Let's say I have "Autofire x10" as a Naked Advantage for up to 60AP. I then drain the Naked Advantage by 30pts. Would this mean I can only have it up to 30AP or would it lower to only applying to a "Autofire x5"? Or could it be either? And if I have Armor Piecing (x4) and I drain it by 25%, could it go down to only AP (x3) or just affect 75% of the original AP it could before? I want to ask the source before I open this to discussion... Thanks as always...

Okay, I am sure I read something about this in the Ultimate Skill book but I don't have it handy so I am just going to ask (and I am going right to the source!). Perception is essentially a INT-Skill. If I was to take Skill Levels in INT Skills, would that affect PER rolls? And on the same note, if I created a "Change Environment" to affect all INT-Based skills, would that also penalize PER rolls? I only ask as I am developing a "Mental Static" power that disrupts the target's ability to think and perceive and wondering if I can accomplish it with a single effect (INT-Skill Penalty) or should I buy it for INT-Skills and each possible Sense? I know the final say is mine (as I am the GM) but hey, always like to know the "official" rule... Thanks!

Re: Giving Power to Multiple People So I have been thinking about this and I thin applying a +1 Advantage - essentially a "Usable As Attack" would be perfect. The defense is that you must be a willing target. It does work if you think about it: -- Making "Flying" a UAA Power allow you to force someone to fly into a wall -- Making "Spatial Awareness" UAA forces someone to be able to see with a new sense Works for me - and then a possible option is another +1/4 Adv to allow the target to pay the END rather than the caster (or something like that). I do like the other idea of a whole-lotta charges but because I want to have a END cost associated with it, this (IMHO) is a great way to go!

Re: Giving Power to Multiple People That works - I had forgotten that Charges don't go anywhere after +0 when the original power costs not END!

Re: Giving Power to Multiple People Or another idea: -- Caster can create a FF spell -- Wants to be able to put it on any amount of recipients -- Each recipient must spend their own END to maintain it Ideas? Or would this fall into the "Usable As Attack" but then the defense is "Only Willing Targets"?

Now I know it says in the rules that "Usable On Others" is how you define a power you give to someone else, either to share or just give them the power. However, what about if you wanted to have something you could give to any number of people but each time costs as if it was a new "cast" of the power? Essentially, here's the situation (this is just a talking point - I wouldn't dare give this to my players) -- A power like "Spacial Awareness" is defined as an oil you smear on your face -- A device can make endless amounts of this oil (it's magic, don't'cha know) -- Each recipient must spend END to maintain the effect How would you define that? Just as a "UBO" with one other person and consider the item has "cast" the effect an endless amount of time? Or would/should I go with a Transform that just remains in effect until the user stops paying END? Or what? Just need a sounding board for this as I can always house rule it but I do like to try and get an official ruling on it!

Re: A Torch is a Torch? I am shocked it took someone this long to do that... here I was hoping it would be my first response but hey...

Re: A Torch is a Torch? Yeah, that works. Again, I am just overthinking things... sigh...

Re: A Torch is a Torch? Oh, I know I needn't worry about stupid things like this but I get latched onto an idea and need to talk it out to make myself feel better. Plus, I am just crazy enough to want to "stat" out everything (you may even remember me asking how to define a Backpack some time ago?). I do that primarily for a magical item idea now and then (the Smokeless Torch or something) so I always want to know the basic concept. Thanks anyway - I am probably just beating a dead horse on this one (again) but no big deal... my quotient of dead horse beatings is down for the month!

Okay, I have been officially driving myself crazy thinking about this so, as always, I am posting something here to either club me back into my sanity or push me over the edge... Anywho, How does one define a torch? I have heard the following ideas: Images, 1-Hex or 2-Hex (-4 PER to "offset" the darkness penalty) Images, multiple hex, "explosion" limitation (to define how the light fades over distance) Change Environment to off-set the PER Penalty to Darkness (and the strangest to me) +to Sight PER; Only to offset Darkness Penalty, explosion effect While the last one seems almost like a Rule Lawyer effect, I do follow it and it (techinically) is a viable option. However, how would most people do it? The biggest question is does "Images" fade over a distance? Meaning would a 1" Hex of light fade as normal? Of course all of this is up to me (I am GM and all) but I do like to hear what others think. I handle it now with the first point but still... what do you think?

Re: Weather Generator Well phooey... sorry to remind you of that! There is one by FaenWorks that seems pretty good but isn't as detailed as WeatherMaster and can only handle one moon... but it seems good from the demo I have used! Does anyone else out there know of how to get a key for the Weathermaster? Another GM friend of mine was very interested in it and now I feel bad I suggested it to him...

Re: Weather Generator Hands down: Weather Master by Milieu Simulations. However, this is a moot point as they no longer produce it. Maybe if you can find a download somewhere (heck, I could send it to you) and then get a key generated so you can actually use it... there is that issue...

Re: Sweep Combat Levels look at that - it is a cumulative penalty that affects all attacks (Thanks KS!!). Helps to read the rules - disregard this question from here forward!

I have found many a thread talking about this but none of them have really address my concern. I know that to offset the penalty skill levels caused by a Sweep you must buy Combat Skill Levels with Sweep (2pt, 5pt, however you do it). But, what confuses me, is that if I am making a master swordsman that can easily sweep everyone who stands around him (essentially a Sweep up to 6 targets) I would then buy 10 levels with Sweep so the last strike would be as "normal" (cumulative penalty would be -10 on the last target). But, if I buy them as a 2pt Skill as suggest by Steve, that would mean my first attack would have a +8 OCV bonus. I don't want to be able to easily hit earlier on - just not lose out to the cumulative penalty. Any ideas? I am sure - when using the Ultimate Skill book - that I could just apply a Limitation of "Only to Offset Negative OCV from Maneuver" but isn't that the exact same thing as if I were to buy Penalty Skill Levels? And now all I am is mildly confused...

Re: Penalty Skill Levels Oh, and all THAT being said, Hero often says that if you can build something multiple ways you should (and I emphasize SHOULD) use the more expensive route. Of course this all boils down to how the GM (Me!) would do it!

Re: Penalty Skill Levels Now, I don't havde TUS book or a PDF of it so I have no point of reference... However, the cost reduction you are indicating isn't much, especially when I round things normally, not just down (I can be a real... "pain"... to my players in that respect, but I do it for everyone, inlcuding the badguys) so the cost reduction in your example isn't much if any. Although, I do see your point - using the limitations does seems to make more sense AND more cost efficient (especially if you go crazy with skill levels like this). That being said, one of things I do is limit my skill rolls to an 18- before a character has to pay double (much like Characteristic Maximums). So, even with the limitations you indicate, using Skill Levels to raise the roll would (eventually) cost more as it would take TWO skill levels to add +1 once they hit 18-. So my players often use the "Penalty Skill Levels" as they do not actually raise the skill roll but counter the penalty. THAT being said, if you didn't limit skill roll maximums then using the limitations may be the better route. They would offset ANY penalty as described so on a one-to-one compare with a 3pt PSL then they would be cheaper. If you are thinking of this as compared to a 1.5 to +1 then the limitations don't make it any cheaper! (2 levels at 1.5 is 3pts, much less than the 6 for your first example).

Re: Identify Spell Oh, I know I can do whatever I need to make a detect more expensive and tons of other aspects. I just like the idea of doce totals to give a result rather than "just" making a dice roll and see how much you made it by... I dunno which would be "better" except for personal preference!

Re: Identify Spell Well, I always thought Detect was just too cheap for the information... but that's just my opinion!

Re: Identify Spell ... ... ... Okay, I have tried to explain why I wanted the fade effect and the only thing I can think of is that the target is magic and resists the effect, causing the power to "fade" over time, which would be pointless in a Star Hero or even a Superhero game. And why couldn't they write information down? I dunno - hence why I ask for input! I do like the idea of using Dispel as a variation, or at least having it as a single thing for each use rather than "you know everything" once it is done. In defense of my cost, however, I think that 5pts/1d6 is okay, but only if I am going the way of a Dispel-like power rather than a Drain. I think a maximum should still apply as it will make truely powerful effects unidentifiable but some information could still be gained. I also think the All-or-nothing allows for a lower cost initially and then apply the Ongoing Results Advantage to increase the cost as described. Any more comments?

Re: Identify Spell Well, I'm the GM so I have to make it complicated! For those of you who are interested, here is a new power I wrote up for Identification (of anything). Feel free to give me your opinions... in case anyone would ever hold back! Power Analysis (!) Type: Standard Power Duration: Instant Target: Target’s DCV Range: No Range Costs END: Yes Cost: 5pts for every 1d6 of Object Analysis This power is used by a character to determine the specific details of any power on a person, area, or object. Each time the power is used the dice are rolled and a cumulative total is determined. Once the total exceeds the AP of the power being analyzed the character will know all the details possible, from the dice of effect to any limitations or weakness. Each Turn the total is reduced by 5pts as the power fades over time. Power Analysis has a maximum possible effect equal to the maximum possible rolled on the dice of the power (if the power has 2d6 the maximum is 12pts, 4d6 is 24pts, etc.). The maximum possible may make it so that a power or effect can never be properly analyzed and no detailed is determined. Just as with Adjustment Powers, Power Analysis is reduced by the Power Defense of the target. This is the defense of the actual target, not the individual who initially created the power. Adders Increased Maximum: As stated before there is a maximum effect possible for Power Analysis equal to the maximum possible of the dice available. This maximum can be increased by 2pts for every 1pt spent. Advantages Autofire: As Power Analysis applies against Power Defense, Autofire costs an additional +1 Advantage. Cumulative: Applying this Advantage will not overcome the Maximum Effect of the power. Delayed Return Rate (+¼ or greater): The cumulative effect of Power Analysis fades at a rate of 5 Character Points per Turn. For a +¼ Advantage the return rate moves one level down the Time Chart. For example, a Power Analysis that fades at the rate of 5 Character Points every 20 Minutes is three levels down the Time Chart, making it a +¾ Advantage. Ongoing Results (+½ to +2): Normally Power Analysis gives no details until it is complete, when it gives everything. For a +½ Advantage Power Analysis can give information on an ongoing basis, based on the total accumulated. The table below indicated the percent of the total AP that must be achieved before the information. The information on the table is a cumulative total, so to get to “Charges” would require 85% of the total items to be analyzed. For a full +1 Advantage the power can gain the Pinpoint Results. This allows the user of the power to determine what effects are learned and when during the process the information is gained. Each percentage indicted on the table is all that is needed for a total. The specific step must be indicated before dice are initially rolled. The step must then be completed and any “extra” can be applied to the next step selected. For an additional +½ (+1½ Total; “Roll Breakdown”) each dice roll can be applied to a different step, each gaining their own individual totals. Extras from this affect (once a step is complete) can be put into any one other step. At the +2 Advantage the total rolled can be divided in any breakdown desired by the individual using the power. Identification Steps - %Total 1) AP of the item (basically, the required total to fully identify) - 5% 2) Type of Psionic within the item (if any) - 5% 3) Number of powers within the item - 10% 4) Command Words for each power/effect - 15% 5) Details of each power/effect - 50% Typical order of details (breaking down the 50%): a. Damage/Dice of effect - 35% b. Advantages (least powerful to most) - 10% c. Limitations (least powerful to most) - 5% 6) Charges (if any) - 5% 7) Noteworthy Limitations - 10% Typical order of the details (breaking down the 10%) a. Limitations that are not obvious - 5% b. Usually Side Effects or disadvantage-like effects from using the item - 5% This advantage can allow Power Analysis to learn some things about a power even if they cannot achieve a higher enough total to determine all details. Limitations Costs END to Maintain (-¼ to -½): Power Analysis only costs END when it is initially used. Each use costs END as necessary but the cumulative effects do not need to be maintained. Applying this Limitation requires the individual to spend END or they will lose any cumulative effect on the power. For a -¼ Limitation the END cost is half that to use the power. The -½ Limitation requires the individual to spend the full END to maintain the power. This is after any Increased END Limitation is applied to the power. Limited Special Effects (-¼ to -2): The standard Power Analysis affects all types of special effects. If this is more restricted then this Limitation will apply. Depending on how the Special Effects are limited affects the value of this Limitation. If the power affects a group of very common special effects then the value is -¼. If it is a single very common or group of common effects then the value is -½. If it can only affect a single common effects or a group of uncommon effects then the value is -1. At -1½ the power is limited to only a single uncommon special effect or a group of rare effects. A -2 Limitation is when the power is limited to only affecting a single rare effect. As an alternative, the power can be limited to be useless against some types of special effects. The values would then work in reverse (useless against a single, rare effect then the limitation would be -¼ and useless against a group of very common effects would be a -2 Limitation). Limited Target Type (-¼ to -2): As a standard power, Power Analysis can affect any single power regardless of the type of power (personal, focus, etc.). If the type of target is fewer than “everything” this Limited Target Type can apply. The more limited the targets the bigger the limitation value. For a -¼ Limitation the target can be limited to be a broad group of types of effects (attack powers, mental effects, etc.). At -½ the effect is of a tight group (personal effects, item powers, spells of the Order of the Red Robes, etc.). For a -1 Limitation it is even more specific (items created by the Order of the Red Robes for example). At -2 this makes for a very specific effect (Only against item created by the High Priest of the Order of the Red Robes).