Surrealone

Hyper-Man: Pssst! I'm a player, not the GM in this scenario. This is also part of why I need to have a confirmed list of benefits if I'm going to walk up to the table to suggest 6e over 5er. Tasha: You mentioned "VPP's are fixed, ie you don't have to take fracking huge VPP if all you need is a bunch of little powers for your utility belt." I took a quick (emphasis on 'quick') look at 5er vs 6e VPP's and didn't see anything substantial/new regarding VPP's...

I actually have Champions Complete (and the PDF for it) -- but have already noted some things are missing from it (items confirmed on these forums, no less). A good example would be the basic template that players start working from (Straight 10's in what was formerly the primaries, 3's for CVs, 2 SPEED, 2 PD/2 ED, 4 REC, 20 END, 10 BODY, 20 STUN, 12 RUNning, 4 SWIMming, 4 Leaping). I couldn't find that anywhere despite reading about characteristic sellbacks. (i.e. I couldn't locate that from which one would commence such a sellback!) Well, the longer we delay a move to 6e, the more dated our materials become, as support material that's coming out is for 6e. So, there's one reason to move. I personally don't have an issue with the funding, but some of the players do. Thanks, I missed that!

I had already found the 2-page conversion summary ... but I'm looking for more detail than it gives. Much thanks for making sure it was linked here, though! Also, as I noted, every player would insist on a copy of the rules, so we're talking $40 x 5 people = $200 .... from a group perspective. That's not chump change. And then there's the time investment, which is worth yet again more to anyone who actually values his/her time (even when having fun, it has a price tag). This is the reason I need a good grip on the advantages -- as the costs, from a group perspective, are not 'total peanuts' as you put it. Thanks for the input from all, so far. I'm actually aggregating it on a PROS/CONS sheet for my own use. I consider the hexes-to-meters issue a CON/drawback to 6e, by the way. Another one I've spotted is that Barriers must be anchored and there's no specific call-out for non-anchored barriers -- whereas in 5er it was explicitly stated they could float if permitted by GM. (GM can always allow it, I know...)

The financial cost, time cost to re-learn rules, re-build and re-approve characters, etc. is sizable for a 5-man gaming group to invest in migration from 5er to 6e. (Note: This is a group where every player insists on owning a copy of the rules for use during downtime.) That said, I'm beginning to dig into 6e rules (a la reading a copy of Champions Complete that I own) in consideration of bringing 6e up with the group. Before I continue, I'd like to know why 6e is worth moving to from a 5er game. To that end, I've repeatedly searched for a concise list of improvements -- and it a) doesn't exist, isn't coming up in my results as a result of a query that's too strict, or c) is coming up in a less strict search ... but is buried by all the other results that come up. Thus, I ask -- why move from 5er to 6e? What justifies the financial and time costs for a 5-man group to do so? Examples of improvements might include: Simplified character /world/object creation More streamlined gameplay (combat, non-combat, etc.-- please be specific!) Fixes to previously problematic rules (Comeliness removal, healing fixes, etc. as examples? -- please be specific!) etc. If I'm to suggest going through the 5er-to-6e conversion time/expense/effort to my group, there had best be a DARN GOOD set of reasons. Some convincing ammo in my hip pocket (that might also serve as info to point my eyes to power improvements, game improvements, etc.) ... would really help!

This ^^^ but make the limited mind control based on EGO, not CON, as it makes no sense for the power to drain EGO but work against CON. (It should all be EGO; this isn't a chemical that the character can resist with stamina; it's all in the mind.)

But in most cases will they be more than 50% different from one another? If not, then the math, above, should work well?

massey, As noted in this thread, the player is using followers for 300-point supers. See this comment: massey, Given bigdamnhero's comment which I just quoted ... as well as other text in this thread, it has basically been implied in this thread that some of the followers are ALWYAS present -- much like an entourage. In such a case the character is basically trying to be a one-man team of sixteen (16) 300-point supers (with himself as the mastermind). If the aforementioned is true, this has gone beyond a "flavor power" -- and even with limitations on number of followers on scene, the followers likely should be spendy (but not overpriced, if limited). I think we can all agree that the GM is reasonably seeking to limit the ability of the player for reasons of balance and has stopped short of invoking GM fiat. You may find a +1/4 to +1 advantage painful by itself, but you neglected to consider the mathematical impact of the limitation I suggested ("limit the followers in such a way that they can only be changed between scenes") ... which is likely a -1/4 to -1/2 limitation depending on GM prerogative ... a limitation that would help offset the advantage ... and also avoid cheapening the cost of followers below the raw point cost (which would happen if no advantage is present). Frankly, with a 50% delta in point expenditures on a per-follower build basis (which is a +1/2 advantage) ... and a -1/2 limitation for only two followers on scene and only changeable with scene changes ... the advantage and limitation cancel and the raw point expenditure remains the same! Assuming all of the followers are mostly human with skills, characteristics, and the like, this is pretty sane. If, however, some of the followers are alien, off-worlders, or vastly different from typical humanoid followers, then perhaps the cost goes up due to an increase in the advantage (to +3/4 or +1). Even then, the cost stays very reasonable when offset by the limitation ... given that the character is paying (before advantages and limitations) 1 per 5 pts to get an entourage of sixteen (16) 300-point supers, only two of which can be on scene at once (changeable between scenes). ​Plainly put, I don't agree with your assertion that this implementation is a flavor power -- because the above use case clearly isn't. Also plainly put, it SHOULD be expensive to have that kind of power all the time as an entourage, and the GM -does- need to place limits on it if he's to allow it without outright saying 'no' by GM fiat -- otherwise the game is prone to being woefully unbalanced.

Am I the only one who is super resistant to the idea of a character paying 1 per 5 for a follower ... and then the follower doing 1 per 5 for a multiform, duplicate, etc? That just smacks of all kinds of broken, to me....

As has been pointed out, there's more than just a combat application. For reasons of both balance and mechanics I think you need to decide how many followers can be in any given scene -- whether it's combat or non-combat -- and start there. IMHO the build-out is unreasonably/un-necessarily complicated if you want N for combat scenes and Y for non-combat scenes. Keep in mind that part of balance is combat utility versus non-combat utility; a character heavy in one is not necessarily great at the other...

Followers going into frameworks seems like a huge no-no. If you and the player are both agreed that only 2 followers will tend to be present in a given scene, then I think it would make sense to charge for 2 followers and permit no more ... but to then charge for an advantage that allows them to be different ... and then to limit the followers in such a way that they can only be changed between scene. For guidance on how much the advantage might be (+1/4 ... to possibly as much as +1), I recommend looking at Duplication's 'Altered Duplicates' advantage, as It provides guidance on the % change between duplicates ... something that might make sense to apply to a % change between followers. Both powers (Duplication and Followers) also cost 1 point per 5 ... so I think it's an apples-to-apples application of the advantage.

I agree -- context is hyper important. I also agree that if Takes No Stun and an END Reserve/Charges are in play, 0 REC/END makes sense. I got the sense that's not the case, though -- hence this topic.

Don't you think a 1/2 limitation is generous given that, as you said, it's almost never an issue in game?

I, too, think the Complication is probably the better route; it's just cleaner.

I don't know that I agree with this. Consider that if there's no natural rate of BODY recovery, it means medical attention doesn't work. With no BODY recovery, blood doesn't clot and wounds don't close ... at all. This implies that hospitalization has no effect and neither does the Paramedic skill's use to stabilize the character. Those sorts of things are worth something. Not much, but something. 5 pts for the complication or something less on an above average REC ... seems reasonable, since there -is- a legitimate new risk at play.

Let's see, REC has the following functions: STUN recovery post-seg12 STUN recovery as a full phase action BODY recovery each month (including medical attention that might accelerate the base rate) So you're suggesting limiting REC such that it loses about 1/3 of its effectiveness (as represented by strikethrough, above). I'd actually argue it's less than 1/3 of its effectiveness ... because when playing ... who actually relies on natural BODY recovery rate? Next to no one ... unless the game's point level is VERY low and the game pace is suitably slow. With that in mind, I'd plant this closer to REC losing about 1/4 of its effectiveness ... resulting in a Limited Power [-1/4]. As for the complication, I see a 5pt Physical Complication, at best: Affects character infrequently (since folks don't tend to rely on natural healing, anyway) = 5pts Barely impairs character's ability to function effectively (rarely has significant impact ... since, again, who waits on natural healing rate for BODY?) = 0pts Obviously, if people rely on natural (REC-based) healing rates for BODY in your world/game frequently (meaning lots of downtime), then adjust the complication upward accordingly. Also, I'm going to say it anyway even though I think it should go without saying: either take the limitation on REC or take the Complication ... not both, as that would be double-dipping. ​That's my best stab at it and how I'd go about it, myself...

Spot-on. Also spot-on.

LOL HM! Actually, they're a group/superset, not a subset. Also, mechanically, they do NOT operate the same since the location that is ultimately hit (when a Special Hit Location is successfully attacked) has a random element to its determination instead of being a purely player-called shot/location like Hit Locations are.

Our game is pretty gritty; player-characters can and do die (as do their foes). Think heroic level Dark Champions and you have the right idea. For context, part of the balance in the scenario I posed at the beginning of this is that the force/energy manipulator is a 2 SPD, 8 DEX glass-jaw with limited movement (usually 7" full move) and defenses. i.e. He's an Average Joe aside from his INT and an extraordinary set of powers ... and he's NOT prone to being adjacent to foes as a result. Typically this character tries to avoid direct combat -- more Average Joe mentality. He's basically a support character who can't hit the broad side of a barn with his VPP powers -unless- he uses AoE, in which case the attack is weak enough to be withstood because of the expense of AoE. Realistically the points are better allocated in swaying the combat for comrades with well-placed shields, UOO force fields, TK to emplace barriers, entangles, that sort of thing -- instead of AoE attacks. The scenario, above, entails a 'perfect storm' for the energy/force manipulator -- likely one where he's backed into a corner and has to fight directly. The likelihood of maneuvering into such a position or finding himself there ... is very, very low ... but if he finds himself in that position, he can really make it count if he gains a positional advantage and catches someone with their pants down (which is tough to do at 2 SPD).

Thanks for the confirmation; I appreciate the second opinion/confirmation on how Increased STUN Multiplier would function in conjunction with a successful called Special Hit Location shot. More technically: It's not just an AoE, but an Accurate AoE -- meaning dodge, martial dodge, CSL's allocated to DCV, and the like are all applicable (unlike typical AoE's where only dive for cover applies). In the above scenario, the target got caught after an action (i.e. with his pants down) by an adjacent foe -- and the two taken together are likely the only reason the low-OCV force/energy manipulator could hit him with this attack. Mistakes like that often hurt! Also, and more technical still, 5er RAW states, "With the GM's permission, a character may target a specific Hit Location with an Accurate AoE attack." Note that 5er RAW makes a distinction between a Hit Location and a Special Hit Location (they have separate names and tables). The former is clearly an individual, specific location which requires GM permission to target with an Accurate AoE attack per 5er RAW ... while the latter is a collection/group of specific locations ... with a random element that determines which of them is hit -- with no GM permission requirement being called out for it. ​The distinction is a fine point, but it's there. In the interest of balance, certainly a GM could rule that since Special Hit Locations are effectively supersets of Hit Locations, GM permission is required to use an Accurate AoE to target either of them. That said, my GM is pretty by-the-book and does recognize fine points ... and the random element (i.e. die roll) to determine which Hit Location within a collection thereof is the resultant target when a Special Hit Location is successfully hit ... is likely enough for him not to invoke GM fiat. P.S. The discussion you linked is one I've been following, but this seemed sideways from that discussion since it's about the STUN Multiplier, not targeting.

Got it -- so a compound power is essential. Now that I follow it fully, I'll mark this solved with your original build-out. Much thanks for the help/lesson. Surreal P.S. Intrigue is pretty common for this character and, as a result, in this game. 5 points of 'Member of upper nobility: Duke' tends to come with some annoyances, and intrigue (as others jockey for position/status/standing/wealth) is among them. When a high-INT character comes across enough of it, he tends to 'learn the game' well enough to anticipate it ... by seeing through plots that are not very carefully veiled. My GM tends not to use Deduction/Tactics often enough to properly represent the character's ability to notice things that I, the player, might not pick up ... so I need to drive the issue ... as I'm tired of racking my brain on things my character should readily spot.

Scenario: A 5er force/energy manipulator with OCV 3 makes a called Head Shot from the Special Hit Locations table using a 1d6 RKA that momentarily forces all matter from a space to form a localized vacuum similar to the vacuum of space ("Blood Boil"). The RKA is AE: 1 Hex Accurate and has a GM-approved +9 STUN Multiplier. While this AE attack would normally target DCV 3, the target happens to be in an adjacent hex, so the effective DCV before modifiers are applied is 0 per RAW. The called Head Shot imposes a -4 OCV penalty per RAW for the Special Hit Locations table, and the target has already acted (unable to dodge or abort), making 4 the effective DCV for the called Head Shot. Per the previous, the force/energy manipulator must roll 10 or less on 3d6 to make the called Head Shot, and he rolls a 9 -- succeeding. The follow-up 1d6+3 roll per the Special Hit Locations table yields a total of 5, resulting in a successful shot to the head (as opposed to shoulders, also included in the same group). Question: 5er RAW for a called shot involving killing damage states, "multiply the BODY rolled by the STUNx for the location hit instead of rolling a STUN Multiplier". The STUNx for a head shot is 5x per the Hit Location table. So what happens to the +9 STUN multiplier on the force/energy manipulator's power -- since a roll for a STUN Multiplier is, per RAW, not made? My first instinct is to add the +9 STUN Multiplier to the 5x from the Hit Location table (for a total of 14x), since that 5x seems to represent a maxxed-out STUN Multiplier (i.e. a die roll of 6 for a STUN Multiplier ... resulting in 6-1=5). This just 'makes sense' to me, but I'm bringing this up for input because, very technically, the cited advantage adds to a roll that per the RAW verbiage quoted above ... isn't made in this scenario. Note: I already looked in the 5er FAQ -- and this isn't covered -- at least nowhere found by searching within it for 'mulitiplier'.

I think it's pricey for what it is, but I also don't need the +2 or +1 and can probably shave costs there. I believe that doing so would look like this (please double-check me, especially the Deduction trigger, which seems strange): Sense Intrigue (Active: 10, Real: 4) (Sight Group) Detect Class Of Things: Clue to a Conspiracy (Anything connected to a plot against character), Increased Arc Of Perception (360 Degrees), Sense Affected As More Than One Sense (Clue can be something seen, heard, or otherwise sensed; +0); Limited Power (Only to trigger Deduction; Power loses about half of its effectiveness; -1), Nonpersistent (-1/4)

I think the pricing makes sense given that his description indicated it's not just sight, but also hearing, touch, etc. (a la: 'The clue could be something seen, heard, or even otherwise sensed'). This means he also gave the sense range (probably inherited from hearing). As for flash, I think the ruling on the field would have to be something akin to: if the sense that would have been used to perceive the clue is flashed, then the sense doesn't work. i.e. If my hero, ConspiracyAttractor, was (hearing) flashed by a sonic grenade while within hearing distance of ThePoisoner instructing his minions to poison the water supply near my base ... my detect/sense wouldn't function. Now if I made a successful Lipreading roll and my sight group was not flashed, then I would have another option to perceive the very same clue ... and trigger the sense. Similarly, if one of my compatriots was NOT flashed, overheard it, and then later communicated it to me -- I could learn the same information from the same event. With that in mind, I think it's very appropriate to provide no limitation for Sense Affected as Another Sense(s) ... and a 0 modifier does jive with 5e RAW.

Interestingly, the character has both Deduction and and Eidetic Memory -- meaning the Detect is probably all that's required. I notice it's not bought as a sense, though ... or with range (hearing?) I presume this is because of the 'sense affected as another sense' limitation you took?

Thanks! No luck with the search function finding a link to the 5e FAQ, but I sent a private message to Lord Liaden; hopefully he has it handy.