LoneWolf

 When I build this power as two separate powers, I am usually finding it cost less points because I don’t need some of the advantages on the healing and can put more limitations on the blast.  Also, as two separate powers I can also use the unified power limitation on both of them.   

The end result works the same pretty much the same.  Technically it does require two separate rolls, but a GM can easily hand wave that and allow it to use the same roll.   From the players standpoint they roll 4d6 and heal their allies and then roll to knock back any undead in the area.   How is it any less cool for the player when built as two powers.   

To me powers should avoid bending the rules as much as possible.  I understand that sometimes the GM may need to allow some flexibility to the rules, but that should be a last resort.  The reason for this is once you start doing that too often the players start to expect it, and this can cause problems.  Also doing this makes it easier when you come back to a character years later and wonder how the hell this power work.  

I have to agree with Doc on not getting upset, I for one am enjoying the discussion. 
 

In most Fantasy Hero games, I have played in undead usually show up at some point.  If you expand it out to demons, then it would be almost always.  They may not show up all the time, but they are usually present.  I would probably put the value of only vs Undead at about -1.  Knockback only would also be about a -1.  If undead are rare than simply increase the value of the limitation.  I have even seen a fair number of champions games where undead show up.   

The fact that healing does body works so poorly is another reason to not use this method.  The chances of doing KB on 2d6 are so small that to me it is just wasting time.  A player should pay for their abilities, but the abilities should have a reasonable chance of working.  This method does not and requires extensive GM intervention for it to be effective.  If I were to allow it I would either count the BODY as if it were a normal attack and subtract 2d6 or consider it to be killing damage and subtract 3d6. In either case 2d6 healing is not going to do anything.  All this is going to do is to slow down the game while the player rolls for something that is unlikely to happen. 

If you are buying the KB as a blast in a combined power, you should get all the limitations you would if you bought it as a separate power.  

The problem comes when you want to add does BODY to healing. First of all, how do you count the BODY?  Do you count the BODY as if the healing were a blast, or since it is Heal body do you count the total of the amount rolled?  Does healing count as a normal attack and use 2d6 for KB, or is it considered killing damage and rolls 3d6?  This is the best reason to avoid adding does BODY to healing.  Second is the fact that you affect different targets with different effects.  To do this you should be using a partially limited power where you apply limitations to the advantages.   As the GM you can of course make these decisions but if the character is taken to another game the player is going to have to go through the whole process with the new GM.  If I were the GM and a player came to me with a power like this, I would not allow it.  

The cost of adding KB to the healing is really not that much.  Depending on the limitations put on the power it will probably add around 6-8 real points for a 4d6 double KB blast.  If this is a spell you might want to consider adding a focus (holy symbol) and extra time.  This is a clean easily understood way that will be acceptable in almost any game without question.      

The ability to knock down all characters in a 4m radius is actually very useful, especially when healing the party.   This is something the player should expect to pay for.  
 

Doing it as two powers is fairly simple and easy to do.    It is two separate effects of the same power, so using two powers make sense.  

  The last few posts are a big reason to do it as a compound power.    This is starting to get more complicated and confusing that two powers.  

27 minutes ago, sevrick said:

Would a combined power healing and telekinesis work instead of blast and limitation (Only to Shove)? It might be expensive though. It would have to have one hell of a limitation bonus, since telekinesis is so versatile.

 

From a game mechanics point TK would work, but as suspect it will be expensive.  A lot of undead have decent STR and the undead would get opposed STR rolls to resist.   TK is also fairly expensive which is going to make this cost even more.

What would be helpful would be if you described what you see happening when the spell is cast without using any game terms.  Include how far the undead are moved and can they resist being moved.  There are several ways I can see this being built depending on the answer.  
 

I am wondering if you really need 4d6 Healing.  On the average 4d6 Healing will heal 14 BODY.  That is a lot of damage.  If you reduce the power to 2d6 healing that is still healing 7 BODY.  Unless this spell is meant to bring people who are down back to full that should be enough.

If you only want to knock the undead down Change Environment may be a better way to go. Reducing the healing and using change environment cuts the cost down to a more reasonable level.

Here is what I came up with.  2d6 Heal BODY, +1/2  4M selective radius, -1/2 Requires Roll, -1/2 Gestures (both hands), -1/4 Incantations, -1/4 Not vs Undead.  Change Environment -4 DEX roll, +1/4 4m Radius, -1/2 Instant, -1 Only vs Undead, -1/2 Requires Roll, -1/2 Gestures (both hands), -1/4 Incantations, -1/2 Linked to Healing.  That puts the active cost to 45 and the real cost to 15.

How it would work would be the character cast the spell and all characters within 4M of the character except undead are healed for 2d6 BODY.  All undead within 4m of the character have to make a DEX roll at -4 or be knocked down.  The penalty to the roll is -4 and it cost 4 END.  Bringing up the healing to 4d6 will increase the active cost to 75 and the real cost to 27 and use 7 END.   
 

 The problem with adding a complication to undead is that would mean that all healing causes them to take KB.  Just because this characters healing is based on something similar to positive energy does not mean all healing has the same special effect.   That type of thing is what I was talking about when I said the Hero System is not D&D or Pathfinder.

The way I would build this is to use a compound power with the healing as one power.  For the KB effect use a 4d6 blast (standard effect), +1/2 double KB, +1/4 for 4m Radius, and put a -2 limitation on it only for KB vs undead, plus any other appropriate limitations for a spell.  See if the GM will allow you to use the standard effect on both the blast and KB roll.  If so this will mean each normal sized undead is knocked back 4M.  Since the KB only affects undead you don’t need selective on the area of effect.  No Damage should be worth at least a -1 limitation, and Only vs Undead is probably worth the same.  You could also add ½ or even 0 END without it costing too much.  The healing part on the other hand is probably going to be a lot more expensive.    

My comment about Hero System not being D&D or Pathfinder was more about the system is very different from those systems and does not make assumption like they do.  Those systems operate very differently than Hero System and often people used to them often make assumptions as to how things should be done.  Direct conversions are usually more trouble than they are worth and often end up disappointing the player.  Things that are consider low powered in other game are often incredibly expensive in Hero, and just as often the reverse is true.  It is usually best to just look at the special effect of the power and ignore all the game mechanics of the other system.  

Don’t forget that you roll an extra dice to determine KB when using killing damage.  That is going to make killing damage less effective in doing KB.  If you look at @Sketchpads suggestion it includes double KB.   That means on the average the attack will do 2m of KB.  Depending on how far you want them knocked back you may need to increase the dice of the blast.  

If you want to just have the undead fall Change Environment might work.  It would mean the undead need to make a DEX roll to remain standing.   The book has an example of an ice sheet under change environment as an example.  This would just be a different special effect.

What it really comes down to is what is the special effect of the power and how do you want it to work.  There is no advantage that makes healing do damage, if you want that you have to buy it as a combined power. 

Hero System is not D&D or Pathfinder.      
 

This can be summed up as “having a higher DEX does not mean you act first; it means you get to choose when you act”.   

Healing is not an attack power.  Does Knockback only works on attack powers.   If you don’t want the attack to do damage, put a limitation on the blast Knockback only.  

If it did work, you would have to heal the undead to knock them back. With the blast being a separate power, you don't have to knock the people you heal back.  

The Hero System does not focus on official RAW like other games do.  It has a lot of optional rules and each GM is encouraged to structure their campaign the way they want it.  When Steve Long was answering the rules questions he almost always ended his post with something like “The GM can alter this if they choose.” 

That being said I would never allow a follower to outshine the player or any PC for that matter.  Also, the point totals are only a rough guideline on how effective a character is.  An experience player with a good understanding of the rules can write up a character on fewer points that is way more powerful than a character on significantly more points.   

As long as the PCs are the main focus of the game it should be fine. 

I have only ever seen this as does not work in intense magnetic fields; the book put that at a -1/4 limitation.  That type of field is not going to be generated by a cell phone or even a cell phone tower.   What will generate it is going to be power stations or other areas near high voltage equipment.   This can often include powers of certain types of characters.  Any character that has electricity for a special effect is going to generate an EM field.  Many technology-based powers will also generate an EM field.  Most power armor is going to trigger this limitation. 

Electricity is a fairly common special effect.  The fact your force field may not offer protection vs an electrical blast or a lightning bolt seems to be a fairly reasonable way to enforce this limitation.  Also getting near generators or power stations will limit where a character can go.  Another way to make the limitation mean something is that the characters opponents can easily protect their lairs by making sure there is an EM field around it.  

In a science fiction campaign the characters power will probably have trouble in the engine room of a starship, or near certain types of weapons.  A railgun for example is going to create problems for the character near it when it fires.  The character will probably still get his defenses from the attack of the railgun unless the character is close to the actual gun.  But if he is standing next to the railgun when it fires his powers are not going to work. 

Everything in the game should have a defined special effect.  Look to the special effect of the powers to make this limitation mean something.

I don’t have a problem with characters being hard to hit with most attacks, as long as they can still be challenged.   If the character with the sky high DCV has poor defenses to the point where one hit with an average attack for the campaign is likely to take them out of the combat that can usually work.   If the character is nearly imposable to hit and can shrug off nearly all attacks that is another story. 

Also, if the character has to maintain a very defenses strategy to keep from being hit that also offsets some of the problem.  The character that has a high DCV due to dodging or applying skill levels reduces his offensive capabilities to balance the character.  The speedster who spends half the time dodging attacks works, the one that shows up and automatically disarms and captures all the opponents does not.  The first speedster has an effective SPD of half his listed SPD, the second one creates problems. 

If the group can work the speedster into their tactics he becomes less of a problem. For example, when the tank of group draws the attacks of the opponents to give the speedster the opportunity to act because the opponent has already attacked involves both characters.     
 

There is nothing wrong with a GM telling a player that is a cool concept but it is not going to work in the game I am running.   The game is a cooperative effort that is supposed to be fun for everyone.  When your concept starts to create problems for the GM and especially for the other players you need to be willing to modify your concept.  In fact this is something that a good GM will do to ensure everyone is enjoying the game.   I would go so far as to say that it is a responsibility of the GM to ensure that no character ruins the fun for the rest of the group.   

A good GM will should give some advice on how to tone things down so you can play a character you want. But they should make sure that no one character dominates the game or creates problems.    
 

One of the things to consider is that in the in the comic books a character is often more powerful in their own comic than they are in someone or when they are part of a team. Often they will come up with a reason but as a rule a character is always more powerful in their own stories.  A good example of this is in a Dr. Strange comic Dr. Strange beat Wolverine in hand to hand combat.  The justification was that Wolverine was possessed by a magic spirit that caused him to fight less efficiently.  If I remember correctly Strange did not use his magic on Wolverine because the sprit gave Wolverine protection vs magic.   

That means when you are basing your character on a concept from the comic books you need to base it off the character as they are in team comic or another character's comic.   If you want to play the Flash you need to play the one character in the JLA comic, not the one in Flash.   
 

Just use Extra-Dimensional Movement to a single dimension.    The dimension you travel to is inside wardrobe when it is fully grown.  Put the limitations OAF (Door to the wardrobe when grown), full turn to activate (Growing the wardrobe and opening the door).  The characters carry the wardrobe in shrunken form on a keychain.  When they want to get something out, they take it off the keychain and grow it to full size allowing them to enter the dimension.  0 END would also seem to make sense, so that would make it cost 13 points.    

The dimension is simply an empty room that contains what the characters put in it.  By special effect they can only put in something that fits through the doors.  They take some larger items apart to allow them to be stored and retrieved, but really large items will be a problem.  You could for example put in large tent that can be broken down, but a car would not work. The GM can decide how much space is in there, but I don't think it is going to be worth a limitation.

A good concept is great, but that should not mean your character cannot be effective.   A good concept should not hamstring your character in every way.  Building in an exploitable weakness into a character is fine but making a character that cannot accomplish what he needs to is not.  While players should be able to play the character they want, that character is part of a team and should be able to carry their weight.   If your characters concept is that they are totally incompetent at combat maybe that concept should be used for a DNPC instead of a PC.

All too often I see people who focus on concept before efficiency fail to actually achieve the concept.  When you concept is a charismatic swashbuckler that can charm anyone and your skill with swords consists of WF blades and 2 3 point skill levels that is not a swashbuckler.  Having the social skills and talents to talk your way out of trouble is great, but don’t totally neglect combat.

Another thing I see is that players focusing on concept often cannot afford everything there concept should have.   This is really common with newer players, or those with limited system mastery.  Often they waste points on something that can be built more efficiently leaving them too few points to purchase the rest of the abilities their concept includes.  Often by rewriting the character more efficiently they can actually get closer to their concept. 

Building a good character is an art.  It requires balancing out what you want vs that which is needed by the game. 

Switching to a different system is going to be a lot of work and may annoy a lot of people.   A lot of those low crunch systems are despised by people who play Hero System.   If I show up for a Fantasy Hero game and end up running 5th Edition D&D I am not going to be happy.   I would rather not game at all then play that system.   

Even if you find a system everyone likes trying to convert a character from Hero System is going to be a lot of work.   Look at all the problems people have when trying to convert a character to Hero System.  Either the players or the GM is going to have to convert the characters.   Having the GM convert characters will often end poorly because the GM may not fully understand the concept the player is using.  Even if the GM does understand the concept a lot of people would rather write up their character themselves. If the players are writing up the character, they may not fully understand the system.  They may also not have access to all the rules and resources they need.  It is also likely to take a decent chunk of time to not only write up the character but learn all the rules of the game that apply to character.    

Hero System has a lot of optional rules and can simulate anything from a G rated cartoon to a gritty lethal fantasy movie.  By changing some of the rules you can create a completely different game without making a single change to the character.   It also cuts down on the learning curve of the players.  Explaining that instead of using hit locations we are using a d3 for the stun multiple takes about a minute or so to explain.  Compare that to explaining something like the combat maneuvers of Pathfinder to the martial artist of the group.  

I can use the flexibility of the Hero System to make the adventure seem totally different with having to spend huge amounts of time and energy it would require to use a different system.  
 

The way I would handle it would be to treat a dream as a different dimension.   This allows the GM to change the rules for the session without making changes to the actual game.   I could see a dream using more of the Champions rules instead of the more lethal Fantasy Hero rules.  If the normal campaign uses critical hits and hit location switching to a d3 Stun Multiple and no critical hits would make it less dangerous.   On the other hand, if you are going for the nightmare type dream using more lethal rules than normal works too.

Basically, it can give the players a break from the normal game and allow them to try something different.  
 

In 6^th edition they nerfed the stun multiple for KA so the stun is a lot less than it used to be.   That means the amount of stun getting through is less on all killing attacks.  If AP is a +1/4 advantage your straight killing attack is more efficient in getting stun through until the target has moderate defenses.  Up to 8 DEF the 4d6 KA does more stun than the 3d6+1 AP KA.  At 10 DEF they are equal, and after that the stun of the AP does slightly more damage than the straight KA.  IF AP is a +1/2 advantage the straight KA gets more stun through until 22 DEF.  Even after that the amount of extra stun getting through on the AP attack is not that significant.  

The Penetrating KA is still getting BODY through on every hit. That is something that very few characters can ignore.    That alone makes PEN worth more on a killing attack.  

I have to disagree with that.  If you compare 3 attacks of the same points, one with no advantage, one with AP, and the last with PEN you see that each one actually has a sweet spot.  The attack with no advantage does better vs a target with no, or little DEF, the AP does better vs a target with moderate to good defenses, and the PEN does better vs high defenses.   On a 60pt power the straight KA does more damage to targets with 4 or less resistant defense, The AP does better on targets to targets with 6 -16 defense, and the  PEN does better with anything with 18 or above.  On a 30 point attack the straight KA again does better on up to 4 DEF, the AP on up to 8 DEF, and the PEN on above 8.   These numbers are based on the current values.

If we change the value to make AP more expensive it reduces the dice on the power so the numbers change.  On the 60 point power the straight KA is more efficient for targets up to 10 DEF, the AP is more efficient at 12 DEF, and the PEN is more efficient at 14 DEF.  On the 30 points the straight KA is more efficient at up to 4 DEF, the AP technically is more efficient at 6, and the PEN at 8 or above.   The difference at 6 DEF on the 30 point power is 1.5 points to 1 point, so really it is not.  

 Below is some charts showing the numbers.

With an AP attack you don’t absolutely need hardened to avoid the damage.  If I have a character with high defense I can bounce the AP attack.   A character with 30 resistant defense that is not hardened will take absolutely no BODY from a 2 1/2D6 AP KA.  That same character will take 2 BODY on the average from a 2d6 PEN killing attack.  I roll 12 for the BODY the minimum BODY become 4.   The only way to avoid the minimum BODY is with impenetrable (or Damage Negation).  I could have a character with 300 points of DEF and they still take the minimum damage.   To avoid the average damage from the 2 1/2D6 AP KA I only need 18 points of DEF.   Your normal defenses are a partial defense against an AP attack.   

PEN is actually much more efficient at getting damage through high defense especially on lower dice attacks.  If it was the same cost as AP (+1/4) it would too effective and would become the default.    
 

One reason is that with an AP attack you can still bounce the damage even without hardened defenses.  A PEN attack on the other hand always gets some damage through.   A 1d6 AP RKA will still do no BODY 5/6 of the time vs DEF 9.  A 1d6 PEN RKA will do at least 1 point of BODY 5/6 of the time vs a DEF 30.