Search the Community

I stumbled upon a quirk with the Focus rules that's really confusing me right now. Let me illustrate: Let's say you get yourself an Armored Costume (Resistant Protection) with Ablative (reduced by BODY), all as an OIF, like the "Realistic Armored Costume" in the Equipment Guide p. 273. So your character is wearing armor that gets less effective as attacks get past its defenses. But: Getting hit also hits the Focus since it provides a defense to the character, and getting past the Costume's defenses means the Focus gets damaged, which knocks out the entire thing since it just as one power. So, I'm not sure if being Ablative actually does anything in this scenario, unless I'm missing something.

I want to build a 'suit' that suppresses the sound of a character's punches and his running. Would it be appropriate to use a Darkness Damage Shield (AoE Surface) build, or should it be done with two instances of Naked Advantage: Invisible Power Effects for each power (Running and STR)? I would also like the 'suit' to stop the wearer from being located by sonar as well, if that changes the build method.

in 6e1, Inherent requires also applying Always On. Always On is forbidden for a power with the Focus limitation. Is there no way to build a Focus with a power where that power is Inherent to the existence of the Focus itself? For example, a power that represents a physical quality of the material/object in question (and is thus not adjustable)...

I have some experience points to spend on a Champions character, and was thinking of repurposing a killing attack power into an attack I use to break objects and focuses. My current power is a deadly 5d6 (with STR) armor piercing killing attack, but by my reading of the focus rules more damage isn't better when it comes to focuses: Would a Penetrating attack or a NND attack with does BODY be better at simply doing the 1 BODY needed to damage a focus? What's your advice?

Looking for some thoughts & ideas on how folks would handle Dispel against a Forcefield power with a Breakable Focus. I understand the RAW*; this is an interpretation question. Champions campaign, standard superheroic level. A gun-fu character with crazy amounts of Luck has figured out that if he shoots the aliens' force field in just the right spot, the bullet can set up a feedback wave that shorts the thing out. He can fit 22d6 of Dispel into his MP, for an average roll of 77. The standard alien forcefield is 14 rPD and 14 rED with Protects Carried Items and OIF Belt for 52 AP. Defensive powers are doubled against Adjustment Powers, so he'd need to roll 104 or better on 11 dice to make it work. [sad trombone] But the character doesn't care about the rED, because all his attacks are physical. 6e1 p194 does allow the possibility of defining a Dispel as only affecting either rPD or rED, and 22d6 is enough to Dispel just the rPD. So Question 1: would you allow the player to buy this as Dispel Only vs. the rPD? Is it unbalanced? Does it make sense for this sfx? Why or why not? Question 1a: if the above was a Drain instead of a Dispel, would that change your answer? Next issue: Dispelling a forcefield is of limited help if the target can just switch it back on at the start of their next Phase. But the forcefield has an OIF Belt. Normally when a Focus power is Dispelled, I tend to say the Focus is drained or damaged in some way and can't be used until it's repaired, typically between combats. (6e1 p195, tho the text leaves a lot of room for GM's discretion here.) So Question 2: Assuming the Dispel roll exceeds the AP of the rPD, but not the AP of the rPD and rED combined, what happens to the Focus? Does the whole thing short out? Is just the rPD on the fritz? Or is the Focus unaffected and the target can reboot the rPD on their next Phase? Question 2a: If the Belt has other defenses attached to it, like Power Def, Flash Def, etc, does that change your answer? Does it make a difference if they all have Unified Power or not? Thanks for the feedback. * Unless of course I don't, in which case I trust someone will `splain that to me!