Search the Community

What is Your idea to "detect invisibility" power? Or how heros can detect ghost, or invisible ghost?

So do powers with Gestures work while the PC is invisible vs sight or in a Darkness vs sight field? sorry to bother you Steve, Found the right rule Gestures: Even though Gestures are normally supposed to be “clearly visible at a distance,” a character who’s Invisible to Sight Group can make Gestures without other characters seeing them or having them spoil his Invisibility. Incantations: If a character speaks while Invisible to the Hearing Group, whether it’s Incantations or normal speech, other people can hear him speaking. I should have read the WHOLE section on Invis

Hi All, I started playing 6th ed Champions with my gaming group a few months ago. I find they min/max the characters and spend 90+pts in offense and defense. We are all experienced players having gamed for 30+ years, but this is the first time with Champions since the early 1990s... I have been using the old 2nd and 3rd edition books, for adventures, and it has been going pretty well, but as a general rule what is a 400pt 6th ed character equal to in 3rd edition? Roughly... If a character selects invisibility (sight and hearing, no fringe, always on), can they be heard while speaking? The player insists he can be heard while speaking, but can't be seen with sonar or infravision. I argued always on is a disadvantage, so no he can not be heard and any discriminatory sight or hearing, other than standard would make the hero visible. Disciminatory senses typically cost 15pts, and it should offset his 20pt power. Am I wrong? Ugh. The same person argued mental paralysis as written CC pg65, states he doesn't need a common way of getting out of mental paralysis, because the book states mental atttacks will do it. I responded: there is no +3/4 advantage: P66 Takes no damage from attack has 3 values +1/4, +1/2, +1. Now go and read the description. at one +1/2 it's transparent to all attacks, BUT +1 can not be attacked,... ... or affected by an outside character. I believe the last sentence is incorrect, ...takes no damage at the +1 (should be +1/2) must specify AT LEAST ONE REASONABLY COMMON AND OBVIOUS WAY TO REMOVE THE ENTANGLE OTHER THAN THE VICTIM BREAKING OUT NORMALLY. He wanted sleep as a common way to break out, but I responded:Yes. Everyone can fall asleep, but not in combat. Entangle is the basis for mental paralysis, and with entangle anyone can help the entangled character with their hands. Everyone has hands, even non-super heroes. Mental blast is NOT common. The book has an error: there is no +3/4 takes no damage from attacks, so I will allow the sleep. Against my better judgement. If you have a not discrimatory sense, and know a invisible character is around, what is the OCV/DCV modifiers? How about hitting blind, with no senses giving a clue as to the whereabouts? The party has min/maxed, so abilities they don't use in an attack is generally low or normal, making it fairly easy to exploit. I've made recommendations to try to be better rounded, but they became upset saying I was trying to micro-manage too much. Is there any advice you can give me about guidelines for character builds? What does everyone think?​

A question occurred to me based upon another thread, where the consensus seems to have emerged (correctly) that Change Environment can, potentially, be used to mitigate the efficacy of Invisibility based upon the SFX of CE and Invisibility. A light-bending SFX would be revealed by a bag of flour dispersed into the air- but another "magic" effect that renders everything touched by the character (within reason) Invisible (perhaps after 1 Segment?) would not- but that person's position would be given away by standing knee deep in "muck" (two obvious holes in the much where the legs go)- but in turn that person (might, based on my read) still be invisible if the SFX were a mental command of "do not notice me." That last one intrigues me. Are mental SFX like that the one the "best" in terms of offering the least vulnerability on the fringes? For that last example, I am inclined as a GM to give opposing rolls to perceivers more or less as you would given normal sense rolls versus "regular" invisibility, with appropriate modifiers as per usual. In this case, it would be for Perception or perhaps Deduction to (like Harry Dresden has done in similar situations) notice "Hey, I can't seem to get my eyes to rest on that corner of the room. I keep looking past a certain space...why can't I look there?" So they cannot perceive the PC but they CAN notice their own behavior has changed- if they make the roll, like someone might hear an Invisible to Sight person walking around. However, would that mean that you could instead build invisibility as a limited form of Mind Control (One command: Do Not Notice Me)? Normally you shouldn't build one Power using another, but is this substantially different enough to warrant the deviation? If you fail to beat the EGO roll then you don't notice that you're not noticing something, etc. Thoughts?