Duke Bushido

And for the true Trifecta of Cobble, you need T-form, EDM, and Desolidification.

Boom.

You can now do anything.

Good night, folks!

Ditto, all the way around.

3 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

 You cannot have darkness that covers the unusual sense group as a whole.  Each unusual sense is considered a completely different sense group.

2 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

 

What I am not seeing is the "reasonably common and obvious set of defenses that cancels out the attack" required by any power bought as usable as an attack.

Yep.  That caught my eye as well.  Darkness is not built correctly until it includes ways to negate or turn it off completely.  Determining the exact special effect of the darkness can often help, as sometimes the SFX themselves have known interactions:  smoke and such can be dispersed with strong  air currents; heat or fire-based powers may dry the moisture from the air and negate fog.  That sort of thing.

2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

Heh wow I had never considered that.  Its too cheap to allow but its a neat twist.

 yep., my guys are actually great, but when they decide they really want to check the system for cracks, they go all out.   Devious little ba--  darlings that they are....

47 minutes ago, LoneWolf said:

That will also work, but the power can be boosted to include those sense groups.  They would be considered Nontargeting sense groups so be 5 pts each.  

I need a quick clarification for 6e:  if the character pays specifically dor Targetting on a normal-not-targetting sense (which, given the nature of rhe five normal,senses, means "olfactory senses"), is it not treated as a Targetting sense after that with regard to Darkness?

47 minutes ago, LoneWolf said:

Each unusual targeting sense would also cost 5 pts, but you have to pay for each one separately.

This is the second time Lone Wold has mentioned this, and there is a very good reason:

He is absolutely correct.  I don't know who approved the builds; as you said you are not intimately,familiar with the rules, I suspect this was either an innocemt misunderstanding or someone more familiar with the rules kinda pulled one over on you, because this "slip up" is the absolute crux of your problem. 

I have never, _ever_ liked the inclusion of the phrase "unusual sense group" because it suggest that, like the Hearing Group or the Sight Group, the entire infinite spectrum of "special senses" are tightly related in a way that makes them similarly vulnerable.  It doesn't help that the rules specify targetting individual senses and targetting 'sense groups' then breaks down the senses into "groups," to include the "special sense group."

The sight group has in common that everything within it is percieved via the eyes, and,is presented to the character's brain as information ascertained by seeing it.

The Hearing group, similarly, is things the character has percieved auraly, meaning they are "grouped" because they generally come in through the ears.

The "special sense group" (even after several,editions, the word "group" remains to cause lots of confusion here) has in common that they are _not part of the five 'normal senses.' 

To be clear:  they _can_ be.  A character may declare that his ability to detect radiation is tied to his Sight Group; that he is actually able to 'see the glowing waveforms of the radiation being shed.'  It might even be discriminatory, where he seea different colors or hues depending on the type of radiation or richer colors from steonger sources.

Similarly, however, he can also declare them to be tied to his Hearing Group, and different frequencies of sound or oscillations of the same shrill keening let him know what kind of radiation and how strong it is.  Maybe he can actually _taste_ the radiation akin to the way we can all taste when our IV is being flushed with normal saline.

But-  and this is a big but--  he is _never_ required to tie them to a sense group.  

The whole "Detect" thing exists to simulate senses that, at least foe humans, are not real.  This makes it impossible for us to understand or discuss how they would work.  So if we do not want to tie it to a normal Sense Group, we buy it as "Detect" The Thing and apply whatever modifiers we want it to have, and do our best to srumble through how it works:

"My character is very in tune with the spirit world, and can just kind of feel when a restless soul is in the area."

Yes; I said "feel," but I sis not mean "sense of touch."  Again, this is because we as humans have a finite number of senses in common, and we cant really,get our heads wrapped around perceiving in a New, never-has-a-human-done-it kind of way.  Explaining color to a man born blind, so to speak.

Muddying the waters is the fact that extraordinary senses are all built,as "Detect."  This leads a lot of folks to the erroneous conclusion that there might be a "Detect Group."  The fact of the matter is that _all_ senses arw 'detect.'

Detect motion.  That's vision.  Detect color., vision again.  Detect size (ranged).  That one, again, goes to vision.  Detect emmision of certain frequencies.,,could be vision. Could also be hearing.  Detect texture.  Detect temperature.  Detect moisture.  All of those are touch.

And So on and so forth.  We use "Detect" to build a new sense because we all underatand what that word _means_, even if we cannot appreciate how a particular thing might be detected, or a common and known thing might be detected in a new way.

The upshot of that is that there is no "Detect group;" that would literally,be every possible sense.

Circling back around to your immediate problem-  well, LoneWolf got it one, and went on to stress it  a second time:

The "Unusual Sense Group" has in common that they have nothing in common; they are a group of detects that belong individually outside of all other groups.  It is not possible to have Darkness,versus this entire group, though it is possible to have Darkness to as many as you can afford, one at a time, for five points each.

Or, to go for an even shorter explanation:

The Darkness builda presented here violate the rules and ahould be re-examined.

Good luck, Sir!

7 hours ago, Jujitsuguy said:

This may be more of a rule question, but more of being creative.

I wanted to be able to beat someone that has Magical Darkness that covers all senses, including Mental Detection.

I am just go8ng to throw rhis out there, because apparently in all the years since Naked Advantages became officially endorsed, only my players are the kind of creative jerks to try this:

Personal Immunity, Ranger, useable as attack.

Suddenly  you are untouchable by at least one opponent's favorite attack.

I didn't allow it, obviously, but it was fiendishly clever.

Build up the new restaurant.  This time, do not refuse Pepsi.  Conquer the world with military might.  Acquire a second restaurant location.

The pros:

Legal, copyright-holder-approved copies.

No watermarks, so you can print hardcopies if you want.

No DRM, though I do not know why this is a huge feature for legally buying legally-sold copies.  _especially_ for legally-minded people who wouldnt think of spreading them all over the universe.  Though I suppose it means you can out a copy into every comouter or gadget you own without fear of reprisal.  I am going to install To Serve and Protect from 3e Champions on my fridge, I think.

Copies are updated (with a fresh download) to reflect changes to the material-  a bettwr copy is found; an errata sheet is added, etc.

Extremely good pricing (the sooner you jump in, the better the pricing.  As the average paid rises, the algorithm raises the threshold.  Not a lot, but some days six bucks is the difference between yes and no. 

Permanent online storage of your material.  Still:  always download it and make a back up, just in case.

Your purchase helps support the cause of the day.  Often these causes are chosen by the publisher or author; I dont really know who picks when they don't.

Cons:  if you werent a Bundle of Holding user from way back, you have to make an accoubt at aome other website (I dont remember what it is; I had storage on BOH before the partnership with this other site, so it was donw automatically for me, and I still access it through BOH)

It isnt free. 

there is the usual "dont you really want to join PayPal" nonsense.

sometimes the bundle is releases with one or two different books that you _also_ want.

sometimes the bundle is released for less than you paid the first time.

Seriously-  that's it.

Oh:

Sometimes the bundle comes out _without_ the book you want, or worse:  it is usually the most-current edit or correction of that book.  If you want to savor a wonky rule or a horrible typo from the first go-around, it won't be there if it has been corrected.

And that is both a con and a pro, so it cancels itself out. 

Bundle of Holding is great. I mean _great_!  It is the only way I could have afforded to read Mongoose Traveller.

Nah.

You can have similar set pieces; you almost _have to_: given that we work within a set of rules that governs interactions, then those ste pieces must work within the rules.

That doesnt mean you have to tell the same story.  You can play checkers with chess pieces, you know. 

2 hours ago, Grailknight said:

 

Ok, I see where we differ, we rounded at each step and you're not rounding until you get below 1/2. A small difference but it does bring in one extra step.

Right, but even that was the rule at the time.  It was ignore,by a lot od people, but it was still the rule: you cut the END in half.  You could stop there, and if it broke at .5 or less, round down; otherwise round up.  But if you were doing multiple functions, you rounded only when you were done.

In the examples we are using- about 50 pts- there is little difference, but there are other numbers, aome of which will have remainders with every splitting.  If you round at each step, you can remive (or add, if you are unfortunate) one or two additional halvings to get the total to under 0.5.

4 hours ago, Sketchpad said:

 

Just out of curiosity, could there be a limitation be used here? "Affected by Magic/Power Defense" or something? It sounds like it should...

Oooh!

Excellent question, Sir!

I guess it would boil down to the exact nature of the character and what those conditions do to him.

If, going from the original text, the character _is_ a magic illusion, then it stands to reason that "suppress magic" or the like would somehow affect him.

There are now two questions that would have to be answered (assuming everyone is willing to have the character actually be affected, because this is deep into "no-rules-for-that" territory):

Question One is "how is the character affected?"   No real reason for us to declare anything; that is for the player and GM to work out.  For me, I would say "it diminishes your existence (if I allowed it, I mean.  Not that I wouldn't, but it isn't in my game, so my approval is irrelevant).

The much harder question, I think, is where does one apply the Limitation?  By the rules, a character can "just be."  If he wants to be a robot, then he is; no charge.  If he wants to be a cyborg dolphin, then "he just is."  As before: no charge.

So we can't put it directly on "being a magic illusion," as he (so long as the GM is okay with it) "just _is_" a magic illusion.

It stands to reason that he can buy his powers and abilities with this limitation- he isn't _required_ to (unless the GM says otherwise), but certainly it would work in with several concepts.

What about his Characteristics?  To my thinking _at the moment_ (meaning that first blush inspired by an excellent question; I haven't done any deep thinking on it just yet) is that putting a limitation on each and every characteristic is the closest approximation of affecting the character's actual existence or ability to "just be."

I can only answer for myself, obviously, but if the question came up and I, as GM, decided that the character _should_ be so affected, that is probably how I would do it: apply the Limitation to every characteristic individually.

Thus, when someone rolls say 20 points worth of suppress magic, each Characteristic would drop by twenty Character points--  that is probably uglier in 6e that in all the editions before, honestly, given the new pricing.  And of course, when the suppression is removed, he is right as rain again.  If that took his EGO to zero or lower, I might rule that, from his perspective, he blacked out, and it is as if he had leaped forward in time with no memory or awareness of the rime that has passed.

Still:  that was an awesome question!  Thanks, Sketchpad!

Expanding on this:

Take a 4d6 RKA and add +1/2 advantage that adds to END-- let's say an AOE.

2e END cost for this 90 pt power is 18.

It takes 6 divisions to bring that to under a hald pip, so zero end would be a +1.5 advantage, bringing the total cost to 225 pts.

Now 2e characters start at 250 pts.

You can see what we dont have a whole lot of zero END powers (though most evergine has a small bit of their power at zero END, just in case).

We see a lot of 1/4 END, aimply because it costa +1/2 in advantage; the same thing later editions are paying to get 1/2 END.

1 hour ago, Grailknight said:

Shouldn't that be 100 points. 5 to 2 to 1 to 0 should only be a +1 total Advantage.

 For 4e and up; yes.

For 1-3e; no.

Though I see I posted a bad number.  The actual cost should be 112.

10d6, in the early editions, is 10 END.  A +1/4 cuts that in half:

10/2= 5END.

Then you keep halving at+1/4 each lick:

10/2

5/2

2.5/2

1.25/2

.625.

.625 is still not less than half a pip, so .625/2 = .3125.  Now we are less than half a pip, which by the rulea is the point at which we can declare the END cost to be zero.

Five halvings at plus one quarter each is +1.25.  The original 50 pt cost times 2.25 is 112.5, or 112 pts.

This gets even uglier uglier if there arw other Advantages on the power, as reduced END is figured after everytjing else, since you need the total END calculations from other Advantages before you can start.

11 hours ago, Steve said:

Power negators have a significant effect on the setting because the lack of them changes things quite a bit.

 

What do the authorities do if they can’t negate powers?

 

In regards to Stronghold, I like the idea of having multiple locations around. There could even be older versions of Stronghold that lack power negators and would have a different feel than a facility that does.

Yep.

My setting doesnt have _true_ power negation.  From our point of view as a game group, that iant the sort of tech we want to become widely available.

Our "power negators" actually drain END, keeping the villains (or victims) at a constant 1-6 END.  Yes, there are arguments in the public as to whether or not this is humane, etc, etc, which we work into the political backgeound now and again-

Now before stating "but Drain: END is wholly insufficient--"

We know That.  We kind if want it that way.  For the vast majority of dangerous villains in our universe, it works:l.  Remember that we play 2e.  A 10d6 EB at zero END is 137 pts.  Zero END isn't something you see a lot of in our world.  Reduced?  Certainly, but rarely zero.

And for those folks who _do_ have a way around an END drain- well, that's part of the suspense, ultimately.

But again, we really don't bother with a lot of detail about prison or court and such: we just wanna stop the bad guys,

Left glasses in the kitchen.

Never understood the appeal of Jerry Lewis.  Never.

Odd.

Ir'a my reacriontoJerry Lewis,honestly.

Never xould divure out what his appeal was.   😕

1 hour ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Honestly?  I prefer to just not think about what happens to supervillains after they are caught. 

Yep, that right there.

Now everyone os going to play tjeit wowm game, amd that level is detail is fun for you and yours, then by all means go for it.  Have a great time.

It just isnt what we go in for, so I don't have much advice. 

Our own,super- prison has different locations because there is a difference between "powerful"and "dangerous."

You can give a 12d6 RKA to one guy, and Satan himself,couldnt make him use it on a living, breathing thing, no matter how many bank vaults he peels open with it.

  You can give it to another guy and he's going straight to the water tower, so to speak.

Unless an adventure is actually set at the prison, ir moving among the inmates is a necessary part of the adventure, we don't really spell it all out.  For us, the inner workings of the prison system isn't really why we spent an hour building characters.

We kind of skin through with "X is in Lockdown" or "Y went to State" or "Z went to orbit (we have a beanstalk that exists for world-breaker class villains.  If all else fails, the stalk can be blown and hurl the contents into the sun ot deep space, buying at least some time).

Villains- regardless of power level- who aren't likely to be a serioua threat to other inmates or staff tend to  get fitted with suppression booots and gauntlets and sent into the regular prison system- we figure with supers so over the place, every state has at least one wing or building with preparations to hold such prisoners.

It is a long-running gag in our campaigns that the hardest thing to lock up is a gadgeteer--  not a gadget user, mind you, but that build-gizmos-on-the-fly, gadget pool with Focus of Convenience and gadget or inventor skills pushing (or breaking) 20 or less...

_these_ are the guys that just don't stay locked up.  Firewing has fewer guards than Gizmoid! 

Even the Kraken in 4e Atlantis _does not have stretching_!  Growth?  Yes.  Extra limbs?  You lnow it!  Stretching?,  nah--  doesn't seem right, apparently.....

Even Allies had exactly _one_ instance of stretching, and it was to represent a weapon (again).  

On a related note:

Dude, you made read Mighty Morphi--  uh..,,Zen Team-- all over again.

That hurts a bit.

Still in the "A" section of 4e, and still looking, but no more tonight.

However, I think I now understand where my "stretching prejudice" may have come from (not all, but _most_) characters I have built with stretching have the power via cybernetic limbs, with various limitations on thie flexibility).

Still,not what you are looking for, but 4e: Alien Enemies, p58 under the scenario titled "The Hatchling:"

Case 39 has 12 extra limbs and 10" Stretching.  

No e!

Thanks,   Chris!

Now we know.

38 minutes ago, BoloOfEarth said:

 

I dunno, you might have trouble getting the horn down.

It becomes gelatinous after extensive boiling.

So you wither cook it British style, or you throw it away

6 hours ago, tkdguy said:

I thought old threads were archived and no new posts were allowed. At least that's what I saw some time ago. Has that changed?

So far as I have seen-- ans rhis is really a Simon question-  some get archived; some get purged (I would assume the oldest arxhives get purged first), but there seems to be an appreciqble effort made to not do either until it is absolutely necessary for the heath of the server and the site.

I base this wild assumption on the fact that as long as I have been here, I have only seen one purge (though more may have hapened during my years-long absences).

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

UNICoRN I could swallow, but CAToBLEPS would be pushing it.

Now, my friend--  let us remember there is a long tradition of....

seriously though:

unless there is a meaning for catobleps with which I am not familiar (amd please enlighten me of that is the case), it is either "catoblepas" or "Katobleps."

He's in the Destroyer category:

The early,auccess of Champions caught the writers off guard:

People want villains!  Quick!  Let's make some villains!

You will find varying levels of shallow to a lot of the legacy villains, though the popular ones get a little with each rewrite.  A lot,of the older guys have Lex Luthor motivations and Dr. Destroyer depth.

2 minutes ago, BoloOfEarth said:

 

For SHIELD, I had to appreciate what they did in the pilot for Agents of SHIELD:

 

 

That was the gag I was rferencing with "SHIELD the Clown Car" above.  Thank you for the clarification, though.

They must have done it in one of the movies as well, as I have never even heard of the show, but I saw the gag.

Or maybe it was in one of the Transformers movies,...

It does if you burn the head off, though.

5 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Star Hero complete sounds good but my sense is that we need more adventures.  Many, many more adventures.  dozens of them for every genre.  Tons of support.

"Sorry; you are unable to spread anymore love right now."

Or whatever That thing says.

Still, agreed whole-heartedly.  I have spent a large chunk of the day look in for a particular kind of character.  Where have I looked the most?

Published adventures and their storehouse of forgotten throw-away characters....