lifo

On 6E1 70 says a single attack in a CSL may be a defined maneuver (Punch Strike, Sword Strike, etc...) or a defined weapon, and in the latter it would apply to all the maneuvers performed with any type of the chosen weapon (if you chose broadsword, you could use the CSL with every maneuver on every single broadsword, not just your own). Conversely, on 6E1 85 in the PSLs cost table the defined weapon option is on the "three maneuvers or a tight group" example, while single attack is above, in the cheaper row. So... 1) Are Single Attacks defined differently from CSLs and PSLs? 2) What exactly qualifies as a Single Attack? Thanks in advance!

As per 6E1 321, to build a Damage Shield you need to buy an attack power with AoE personal surface and No Range limitation, and this shield is personal of the power owner. But usually a No Range attack power is also a power you can use touching the target. So, a DS built by the book would also be a DS you can grant to another character or spread over a surface, unless I limit it with Self Only or the like. Am I missing something or there's a contradiction here?

Re: Building times

Re: VPPs used liberally to prevent character stagnation? I got the whole arcane magic system of my campaign made around VPPs (divine magic, instead, works on multipowers). Every magic user has a Magic VPP, but they can only cast spells they know - pre-made spells that may have settings to be cast at greater power. Spells are divided in 12 schools and each school has its own Power skill to cast them. Magic users also need to refresh their memory on the spells they know on their magic book at least once week or risk losing knowledge of one or more spells (this is built as a Dependance).

Re: Building times Thank you for your help, and to the others too, but actually I don't have a list. My PC's are just in that phase in which straight adventuring is making way to the responsibilities of managing dominions, cities, families and so on. One of them, especially, has went full fledged expansionist, having bought a shipyard and planning to use the ships he will build there to colonize an island - thus, houses and castles - he own and to start a commercial shipping network. So, what I'd really need is a fairly reliable system, that a least looks realistic, to determine time needed to build castles, houses and ships. Just to have a rough idea, because I don't know anything about this argument.

Re: Building times I still don't have the faintest idea on how many men and days are needed to build something, but the derived discussion is really interesting. Please, continue.

Re: Building times A question that I know quite well otherwise I wouldn't be asking here. Those figures seems a little bit guessed for my tastes. I tried looking for some infos on the internet but nothing turned out. It seems that nobody knows how many men or days of work were needed to build a ship.

Does anyone know where to find how much time was needed during the middle age/renaissance to build houses, castles, boats, ships, carriages and other large objects? A rough enstimate of cost and people involved in the construction would be useful too.

What kind of CSL should I buy to apply to non-martial combat maneuvers (those in 6E2 56, to be clear) only when unarmed? 3-points or 5-points? I intend to do that to represent crude brawling skill.

Re: Anti Magic-Field Thank you, guys. You really gave me something to work on. I have to say that Folded transform idea intrigued me a lot, but also the proposal of giving a "doesn't work in AM field" to every spell and then alter a base power to function as AM power could be a nice course of action (I didn't get it right the first time. Doc was right). I'll put some more thoughts about the impact that I want AM have in my campaign and the I'll decide which to use.

Re: Anti Magic-Field That's an interesting idea, but I fear it would reverse the problem, making AM too easy of a task for every caster. The problem in designing fantasy magic is that everyone with magic abilities could do the same at one point. Oh, by the way. I think you'll better understand what I'm looking for if I reveal the fact that my campaign is actually a conversion of an old D&D campaign. Thus, I'm looking for that kind of impact of AM in the game.

Let's consider Magic as a whole as a single special effect and assume that anti-magic is something that wizard can cast and create. An Anti-Magic Field will be constructed this way: Anti Magic Field: Suppress - Drain Magic 1d6, Area Of Effect (4m Radius; +1/4), Magic Powers (+1/2), Expanded Effect (all powers simultaneously) (+3 1/2) (52 Active Points); Costs Endurance (to maintain; -1/2) But that is just for 1d6. To be an effective Anti-Magic field we should probably raise it to the maximum AP in magic powers achievable in the campaign using the standard effect rule. Let's say the maximum in the campaign is 100AP. So we'd need about 33d6 of effect, making the field (at 4m radius) cost 1732AP/1155RP. Is it not too steep as a price for, like, every campaign with that AP cap or am I missing something? I understand that suppressing entirely all powers of a single special effect is a really powerful weapon, but that price seem too much.

On 6E1 142 says that an adjustment power can affect, with GM's permission, all the powers of certain sfx with +4 Expanded Effect + Variable Effect advantage. On APG 55 says that you can affect either of two sfx adding a +1/2 advantage, and double the number of sfx for each +1/4. And what about affecting two, or more, sfx simultanously? Do I have to add another advantage or the only way is to link two, or more, adjustement powers, each adjusting one of the sfx involved? Thanks!

How can I build such kind of a Barrier (eg: the classic energy shield that stops lasers but physical creatures may cross freely without destroying it)? Thanks!

The Grant Wish spell build in FH6 304 has a Persistent duration advantage in it. What's the purpose of that and shouldn't be only legal to buy for a Constant, 0 END, power? Thank you.