jtelson

Re: The cost of killing damage

Metagaming removed by appropriate skills. Analyze Powers, Analyze Martial Arts, both of these give metagamey information, even if put into non-game terms.

Assuming that the powers are meant to model actual things, those classes of actual things are understandable by people experienced at dealing with their general type. So anyone with tactics, KS: Supers, KS: Powers, etc., would be able to know these things. Or, put another way, do you in the real world know the difference between a knife and a fist?

Removing metagameyness also works against the KA-wielder's interests. As a crude approximation without detailed game knowledge, the broad generalization will go: people with the more lethal and unpredictable attacks always get targetted first.

Yes but do I know the dice value difference between a knife wielded by a guy who can throw a motorcycle at me and an ice cream truck being wielded like a club? In a superhero world, even with analyze skills, the GM particularly needs to be careful about how his NPC's make decisions.

Well.. yes.

Only it would be, "We've never seen anything _like_ this guy before.."

If the guy presents the generic appearance of someone predictable, then he's less of an uncertainty, but this is a common social effect, aggression towards strangers (xenophobia).

That presumes that all participants view reducing uncertainty as the surest means to maximizing utility. Since we really should be talking about the players, yourself included, rather than the characters this presumption is, I hope, unlikely. In an RPG increasing enjoyment (Yours and Other Participants) should be the surest means to maximizing utility. One way to increase enjoyment is good roleplaying, one aspect of good roleplaying is understanding that characters (Player and non) are going to have different views on maximising utility. Reducing uncertainty is one, sure. Increasing reward, delaying or preventing punishment, delaying/denying another participant's reward, assisting other participants are all common methods of maximizing utility particularly since we are playing non-zero sum games.

Re: The cost of killing damage

No. Intelligent opponents' date=' by Game Theory, _ought_ to take out the target with the KA in preference to the target with the Normal attack, so long as the target with the Normal attack doesn't have more than three times the DC's of the KA.[/quote']

 

The obvious Meta Game concerns aside (How would a villain know if Brick A's HtH attack is 2.5 times vs. 3.5 times larger than Brick B's HKA? etc) this presumes that uncertainty is directly related to the utility of target selection and so the less you know about a target the higher level of threat you assume they present.

"We've never seen this guy before, DOGPILE!"

Re: Clinging, UAA

There are a lot of things that can be built a lot of different ways' date=' that doesn't make them dubiously legal. By that philosophy, which other of the alternate ways to build the power are dubiously legal? The problem with Flight UAA is you have a way to move someone around with no way for them to break out of it. They either have the defense, or they're stuck forever. Clinging doesn't offer the same problems to that extent. It has the STR vs STR or the destroy what you're clung to.[/quote']

 

Dubiously Legal in this context is specifically from the text of UAA as you should be well aware by now. I'm not saying that opting for TK over Change Environment is Dubiously Legal. I'm saying that following the reasoning laid out by the UAA rules, Clinging UAA is Dubiously Legal.

Re: The cost of killing damage

I assume comic was just kidding when he said that, based on his previous post(s). In any event, the standard deviation doesn't matter in this case, since Hugh's calculations already took into account the entire range of rolls.

 

But you got it backwards (perhaps you simply mistyped): the *more* dice you roll, the *higher* the StdDev.

 

In case anyone is interested, the Standard Deviation on the total of N dice is SQRT(35N/12). That is "the square root of 35/12 times N." I'll try to write it graphically here:

 

   ______
 / 35xN
/ ------
V    12

 

The larger N is, the larger this value will be.

Sorry, I was including the (1,1,2,3,4,5) multiplier in the fewer dice (aka Killing Attacks) populations. So Fewer dice with the 1d6-1 multiplier will have a higher Standard Deviation than 3x straight dice.

Re: Clinging, UAA

But it isn't the same thing. They have different pros and cons.

Flight UAA isn't exactly the same thing as TK, but it is still described as dubiously legal. The general effect of Clinging UAA can be achieved with a myriad of other powers and so to should be considered dubiously legal at best.

Re: Clinging, UAA

No TK doesn't require LoS through out the use of the power. Heck doesn't "require" LoS at all. You can use TK to blindly attack someone in a field of darkness, you can't do that with a power that's UAA. I can't think of a single constant power that does requires constant LoS.

Reread the section on constant powers (Pages 98-99) where it says 'Thereafter, the character must maintain a Line of Sight to the location of the power...'

All constants that work against a target require LoS.

Re: Constant duration AoE, UAA issue

I think that a constant AOE targets a hex and doesn't move, rather than accompanies a moving target.

If you want it to accompany a target, you're ruling would be the minimum I would require.

In my experience most powers that have AOE, Constant and UAA advantages layered on them are going to be unbalanced.

Re: The cost of killing damage

Can you two do this math again, factoring in the following:

 

a) Standard Deviation (which doesn't scale up linearly with the 15 pt/3 DC model)

Iterative cycles of Recovery, Knockback and counterattack for comparative pairings?

a) If you know enough to ak then you know enough to calcuilate it, suffice to say the fewer dice rolled the larger the StdDev.

I could do the math for this (or more accurately what you want rather than what you're asking) but that kind of modeling is expensive and time consuming out here in the real world.

Re: 4-power

44 Duplication (creates 3 233-point Duplicates)' date=' [b']Easy Recombination[/b] (Zero-Phase Action at Full DCV) (67 Active Points); Restrainable: can't duplicate or recombine while confined (-1/2)

 

22 Multiform (300 Character Points in the most expensive form) (Instant Change, x4 Number Of Forms) (75 Active Points); Only works while duplicated. (-1), Costs Endurance (Only To Change; -1/2), Increased Endurance Cost (x2 END; -1/2), Lockout all Duplicates must be in same form. (-1/2)

 

35 Mind Link , Duplicates only, Any dimension, Number of Minds (x4), Psychic Bond

 

Is this a valid build? And would you allow it?

I would probably rule that Lockout in this situation would be a -0 Limitation on Multi-Form unless Duplication was purchased with the Altered Duplicates advantage.

Re: Clinging, UAA

Now that I think about it, if I have someone in a TK grab, I can close my eyes and keep that person in the TK grab, I don't need to keep LoS once I have the grab. Same with Change Environment. If I'm flashed I'm still able to lash out blindly with both those powers. None of that is true with UAA based attacks. If I have a TK grab and get flashed, nothing happens to the TK grab. If I have Clinging UAA at get flashed, my UAA Clinging turns off.

 

As far as cost and Active Points, I'm talking about overall pro's and con's of the power. If you can legally accomplish the same thing with a cheaper cost, that's obviously a benefit.

All constant powers require Line of Sight, there's no difference between TK LOS and UAA LOS.

Isn't the rule that if you can accomplish the same thing with a different power particularly if UAA is less expensive you shouldn't be using UAA?

Re: Clinging, UAA

Not really. TK can pull you down to the surface' date=' Change environment could go either way, but if you had to be in contact with the surface that would make the power cheaper, the same with Entangle. I was saying it's like an NND more because it has the limitations of an NND, not the advantages.[/quote']

 

TK & Entangle would have a lower real point cost if it had the requisite only in contact limitation, but active cost is what's generally used when comparing utility. Change Environment reduces running/leaping and so carries with it an effective Only in Contact component automatically.

 

Ultimately you gain far more utility with UAA on clinging for a greatly reduced active point cost than TK or Entagle.

Re: Clinging, UAA

Both TK and Change Environment also requires LOS. I'm not sure we necessarily agree on how LOS works but 2 out of 3 of the non UAA builds suffer the same limitation.

Since the point costs we've been seeing have specked the various powers out to be relatively similar, I would say that if UAA Clinging is effectively an NND then it is woefully underpriced particularly since the limitation (Must be in contact with a surface) is likely to be one that affects the other builds as well.

Re: Clinging, UAA

I don't hate spiderman. Particularly. I also don't think that UAA clinging is how his power works' date=' at least not his web power. I'm pretty sure that's an entangle.[/quote']

 

Not only is it an entangle but if you look at all the various advantages and adders associated with entangles, most of them look like they're spider man inspired. It's almost as if someone went, 'When I think of the entagle power what super hero will the players want to emulate?' and the answer came back

'Hey There True Believer! who else would it be?'

Re: Catching cars

I don't have the book here but I have a vague recollection (Meaning it may have been two editions back) that the prohibition on Missile Deflecting AoE attacks was special effect dependent (Can deflect grenades can't deflect 'I explode' and so on). So if the character could casually lift the car I would say he could missile deflect it using Missile Deflection, otherwise I'd probably take it on a case by case basis.

Re: Clinging, UAA

I think someone's got to say it. That might be the single most insane ruling I've seen since I was a Magic:The Gathering judge (For reasons all chronicled in depth previously).

That being said that's the ruling and it effectively ends the discussion.

Cheers

JT

Re: Clinging, UAA

Several builds have shown that a similar effect can be accomplished with a complex Entangle build. However' date=' a big difference is that Entangle is fire-and-forget and Clinging UAA would not be. It would require at least eye contact to maintain. If the owner of the power is Stunned or KO'ed the effect would immediately end.[/quote']

 

Both Change Environment or TK are not complicated, they cover your concern for end use and have the advantage of actually working.

Re: Clinging, UAA

There's no inherent 'you are immobile' effect to Flight but add UAA and it can be used to keep a non-flyer from using other forms of movement just by holding them 1" off the ground. What is being suggested for Clinging UAA is not that different.

Inherent in Running is contact with the ground, 1" of flight removes that contact and thus renders Running unusable. Clinging in no way indicates that it negates movement or any prerequisite for movement.

Re: Clinging, UAA

It stops movement. That was the intention. The only real question about my way is whether UAA can effect part of an object. I know I've seen it before' date=' but can't seem to find it.[/quote']

 

It mitigates a damage effect. It doesn't stop movement and nothing in the power description indicates that that was clinging's intention. Nor should you be argueing what the power's intention was. If you were going with intention and spirit rather than letter, we'd have settled on Entangle, TK or Change Environment 7 pages ago.

Re: Clinging, UAA

The fact that Clinging can resist KB means the character has to be stuck on the surface. If I'm clinging to a wall you can't just push me around the wall as if I were on ice. If an attack that does KB hits me' date=' I don't slide along the surface, I stick there.[/quote']

 

Once again, no where in the clinging power does it say you can't resist knockback or use the clinging's STR to stick while moving, there's no 'you are immobile' effect inherent to clinging.

 

And UAA itself has no component that allows you to effect part of an object. When targeting an innanimate object you must be able to effect the entirety of its mass.

Re: Character Idea (multiform?)

My opinion is probably not representative but the first thing I look at when determining if something should be Multi-Form vs Only in Super Hero ID (OISHID) is the character's mind. If the character should have the same skills and psych limits in both 'forms', I lean towards OISHID.

As a GM I can't tell you the number of times I've had players show me characters with multi-form whose forms completely share memories but have completely different skill sets (This form is too clunky to do acrobatics is fine but if you have the same brain why do you forget how to speak spanish and loose AK: South America?)

If the brain is the same but most or all of the powers are radically different MF may still be your best bet but it looks like with this build you may just have an EC and/or MP that's OISHID.

Re: Clinging, UAA

Handcuffs have all three (sidebar p168); that's good enough precedent for me.

Wow you're right, my characters must have been buying their handcuffs from Williams-Sonoma all these years.

This is as embarrasing as not realizing that half moves no longer caused a -1 OCV penalty.

Re: Clinging, UAA

Not exactly. It would only effect human mass of the object. Since you're feet would fit into a human sized object' date=' we're okay there. The same applies to Invisibility UAA. Let's say you want to see what's on the other side of a wall. You could use your Invisibility to make a human sized portion of the wall Invisible so you could look though it. I'm only making a human sized portion of the wall have clinging.[/quote']

 

A gamemaster might allow that but that's operating outside of the way UAA is defined by the rules. I can't teleport part of an object away if I have Teleport UAA.

Re: Clinging, UAA

Fly Paper: Entangle 6d6' date=' 3 DEF, Costs END Only To Activate (+1/4), Takes No Damage From Attacks All Attacks (+1/2), Uncontrolled (Lasts 1d3 Turns) (+1/2), AOE (15" Radius; +1), Two-Dimensional (-1/4), Continuous (+1) (180 Active Points); Does Not Prevent The Use Of Accessible Foci (-1), Set Effect (Hands Only/Feet Only) (-1), Cannot Form Barriers (-1/4), Nonresistant DEF (-1/4); END: 17; Real Cost: 51 [/quote']

 

Can you take both Set Effect and Does Not Prevent the use of Accessible Foci (and Cannot for Barriers for that matter)? I always thought they were redundant.

 

Personally, I think the Change Environment approach is the cleanest build for the "make a surface like fly paper" effect since it already affects an area and already has a mechanism for making it long lasting, thus avoiding the need for Uncontrolled and defining some arbitrary limit on how long it will last.

 

Ever since they took away using CE for flashlights, I almost never remember they can be used for things other than weather control.

I think you're right, it is the cleanest approach for this effect.

Re: ~ All Out War~d&d Vs Hero Vs Palladium

If Steve Long is Alton Brown' date=' who's Bobby Flay? [/quote']

 

Kevin Siembieda, but then I have a keen dislike for both Palladium and Flay.

Re: Clinging, UAA

Is there any non munchkin reason why anyone would not want to this as

Vander-Magnetic-Web-Static Stickiness: Entangle, AOE 1 Hex (+1/2), Takes no Damage From Attacks (+1/2), Set Effect [Cannot Move, 1/2 DCV, Can use Foci] (-1), Entangle Cannot have More Def/Body than Surface Attacked to (-1/2).

Seems to cover the effect desired without the irritating rules questions.