Infinite Loops

[GAZZA]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

The problem here, is in order to answer that, you must also answer, 'relative to what.' And everyone has a different standard.

Except that this is a points based system, so that question isn't hard to answer. "Relative to similar powers". Specifically - Succor is far more points effective than Aid. Suppress is far more points effective than Drain.

 

There is no subjectivity here. Just compare the costs of the powers. Mathematics is not subjective.

 

It's way more elegant than a continuous Aid that aids itself is, as you don't have to do any clunky math to figure out how much the aid maximum goes up over time.

Sure. But it's more elegant in exactly the way that a new 10 point power "Target dies" is way more elegant than a 10d6 NND RKA Does Body. There's no question that the former is easier to write down, and doesn't require any clunky math to work out what the active points are.

 

But elegance should not take precedence over balance. I would argue that Succor (or Suppress) working in the way you suggest is completely unbalanced, and I point to Aid and Drain to prove my point. To achieve the same result with an Infinite Aid as you can with an Infinite Succor requires far more points. OK, it's an infinity loop, so the points don't matter. But it's also going to take far less time. You're getting way more bang for your buck - so much more than there's really no point to having an Aid power at all. Just set up a Continuous Succor with an appropriate limitation that maxes out at wherever a normal Aid power would. That's the real problem - I don't really care what happens at the infinity level, but how it scales back down to things I would actually use on a character.

 

It's quite easy to put some simple but effective controls on it as well,

The simplest of which appears to be (from my perspective), "No, you can't do that."

 

and is naturally more limited in many ways. As a constant power, it goes away when the person generating the power gets stunned, how long it stays up is dictated quite nicely by END concerns (assuming you don't go for the 0 END version)

So in other words, if you don't buy 0 END for it, then it's OK?

 

Buying 0 END makes the problem show up more easily, that's all. Get the +2 version that boosts all your powers at once, and make one of the powers an END reserve.

 

The problem is that it's virtually impossible for me to think of a way to use this that isn't abusive.

 

and you can quite simply state a maximum level of effect if you're concerned about the power going on forever

At which point you've just bought Aid - only cheaper.

 

No problems with balance there at all, it just requires a bit of GM control. (And what power doesn't?) I definitely prefer it to the relatively clunky Aid version. But to each his own.

A GM can control anything so that it does not become abusive. But that does not mean the power is not abusive, it just means that the GM is going to apply whatever house rules or common sense he feels is necessary to control it.

 

That's fine. And I've already indicated what my approach is going to be here (simply ban Continuous on Succor and Suppress). But a good construct doesn't need a GM to nerf it or control it.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

I almost hate to say this....

but thanks guys!

This has shown me a very elegant way to reproduce some of the more obscene Aid constructs I put together for various 4th edition campaigns I had (back before Aid was fixed (neutered? ).

I like many of the options this opens up, but thats mainly from a GM's perspective. I would question hard a character showing up with one... I might not veto it, but I would certainly take a hard look at one and perhaps work with a player tpo tone down oe that would have unreasonable effects in the game.

 

I started getting very tricksty with constructs like this when I started trying to introduce Higer Order powers into heroic level games while still holding onto the 4th edition standards of No Frameworks and Pay Full Points.

Let me do a few things like Juilan May style Operant Metapsychics into my Star HERO campaign without breaking the bank (This is almost exactly how I did the CE suit) as well as similar effects when trying to run a FH game in Steven Brust's Draegaria. Trying to cope with vast power levels got very tricky.

 

I can and have replaced a lot of those constructs already, but this would be truer to the original build (and spirit) than what has come after in some cases.

[DangerousDan]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Succor has not upper limit is you keep using an Attack Action to add to it, END costs can spiral up pretty quickly though.

 

(Edit: minor point for clatification: 5th Ed. is referred to as FRED, the Revised is referred to as 5ER.)

 

FRED says Succor works just like Aid, except that it costs less per die and you have to pay END to maintain the boost. No mention of waiving maximum effect limitation. Does 5ER specifically mention that there is no maximum effect limitation on Succor?

[DangerousDan]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Of course, if one goes by the book, "costs END only to activate" is applicable only to a very restricted group of powers (body-affecting, IIRC).

 

Notwithstanding the fact that many of us allow and use it for other powers, it's not Steve's fault if someone breaks the game using a technically illegal construct, is it?

 

A perfectly legal way to buy "Costs END only to activate" for any power it is not normally applicable to is to buy Costs 0 END and then apply a (-0) limitation: costs END to activate. You cannot argue that the advantage is too small or that the disadvantage is too great. It merely becomes a question of whether it is permitted at all.

[Zed-F]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

FRED says Succor works just like Aid' date=' except that it costs less per die and you have to pay END to maintain the boost. No mention of waiving maximum effect limitation. Does 5ER specifically mention that there is no maximum effect limitation on Succor?[/quote']

I expect so, since it's been stated that way in the FAQ for quite a while.

[Zed-F]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Except that this is a points based system, so that question isn't hard to answer. "Relative to similar powers". Specifically - Succor is far more points effective than Aid. Suppress is far more points effective than Drain.

 

There is no subjectivity here. Just compare the costs of the powers. Mathematics is not subjective.

Ah, but there is subjectivity. The math may not be subjective, but the basis you use for comparison certainly is.

 

Suppose I don't think Aid should be the gold standard here -- which I don't. Suppose I think the cost of the characteristic being boosted should be the gold standard.

 

+20 STR -- you have the full benefit immediately, all the time, plus figureds to boot. Costs 20 AP.

 

1d6 Aid STR, bought up to a max aid of 20 STR -- You have to start the power and keep using attack actions to get it up to 20 over the course of several phases. Once it starts to fade, you have to keep using the power (and attack actions) to keep yourself boosted. It's vastly inconvenient and gives you no figureds. Costs 17 AP.

 

1d6 Succor STR, Continuous, Costs END to Activate, with a cap of 20 STR applied -- You still get no figureds, you still get access to your STR slowly, and now you have to pay a 1 END maintenance cost just to have the power running, on top of the cost of using the STR. Moreover, if you get stunned, it shuts down and you have to start over again, plus the power is visible. It's clearly not nearly as good as just buying 20 STR. But, it's a lot more usable than the Aid, and at 11 AP, the cost relative to buying STR straight up seems reasonable.

 

I'd argue that the one whose cost is out of line here is Aid, not Succor. To be blunt, Aid sucks. The entire basis of your argument is that Succor costs less than Aid. So what? I consider that a feature, not a defect.

 

As far as Suppress goes, the problem is not so much Continuous, as that Suppress is a 'better' power to begin with than Drain is. If I buy a 4d6 Suppress as opposed to a 2d6 Continuous Suppress... well there really isn't that much I can do with the continuous suppress that I can't do just by attacking with the Suppress power again.

 

Let's look at (A) 4d6 Suppress vs. ( 2d6 Continuous Suppress where both are repeatedly attacking the same target.

Phase 1: A - 4d6, 2 END; B - 2d6, 2 END

Phase 2: A - 8d6, 4 END; B - 6d6, 6 END

Phase 3: A - 12d6, 6 END; B - 12d6, 12 END

 

Yes, the continuous suppress will eventually outpace the regular suppress, but by the time it does, the target probably won't have anything left to suppress anyway. Plus, any power defense at all will hose the continuous suppress, and the END costs rapidly get prohibitive.

 

Of course, that's not to say Suppress doesn't have its own quirks and drawbacks. It doesn't play as nicely in a multipower as a Drain does, for instance, since it locks you into that slot. But the fact that Suppress is superior to Drain in many ways hasn't got anything to do with Continuous -- unless you want to start talking about advantage stacking, which is another issue entirely (anything can be abused if you pile enough advantages on it.)

 

So in other words, if you don't buy 0 END for it, then it's OK?

 

Buying 0 END makes the problem show up more easily, that's all. Get the +2 version that boosts all your powers at once, and make one of the powers an END reserve.

That's not proving anything. You wouldn't allow a limitless Aid that boosts all your powers either, now would you. Just use a little GM common sense.

 

The problem is that it's virtually impossible for me to think of a way to use this that isn't abusive.

You mean like the one I just built above?

 

A GM can control anything so that it does not become abusive. But that does not mean the power is not abusive, it just means that the GM is going to apply whatever house rules or common sense he feels is necessary to control it.

 

That's fine. And I've already indicated what my approach is going to be here (simply ban Continuous on Succor and Suppress). But a good construct doesn't need a GM to nerf it or control it.

You need GM control for everything; all powers can be abused if you take them to their illogical extremes. You can abuse Aid just as easily as you can abuse Succor, the only difference is how many points you need to spend to do it. So you set the standards and controls a bit differently for each power, what difference does that make in the end? You still have to apply them to both.

[schir1964]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

FRED says Succor works just like Aid' date=' except that it costs less per die and you have to pay END to maintain the boost. No mention of waiving maximum effect limitation. Does 5ER specifically mention that there is no maximum effect limitation on Succor?[/quote']

The FAQ for 5th Edition clarifies that Succor has not maximum cap on it. This was included in the 5th Edition Revised with a note that it works like a positive form of Suppress.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

5ER 134: Succor adds with each application with no maximum.

 

I would do Hulk Rage as:

 

3d6 Succor STR, Trigger +1/2 (resets auto, character doesn't control, each time angered), 0 END +1/2, (30 Active Points); Self Only -1/2, (20 Real Points)

 

You could expand it to other characteristics as well. Personally, I think this is a very elegant way to handle this power and is more representative than using Aid.

 

Continuous and Suppress or Succor actually makes sense to me as it eliminates the need to make an attack roll every phase to apply the power to the target.

 

As long as the GM ensures this construct isn't used in an inappropriate manner I think it is very useful in representing some key powers.

[schir1964]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Actually Zed-F, adjustment powers are completely inconsistent as a whole for cost vs benefit, but for a completely different reason.

 

You can read all the details by searching for "Adjustment Powers:" thread that I created.

 

- Chriistopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

...Suppose I don't think Aid should be the gold standard here -- which I don't. Suppose I think the cost of the characteristic being boosted should be the gold standard.

 

+20 STR...

So to prove your point you use a Characteristic that half the people here think is undercosted for the benefit it gives. (8^D)

 

It would have held more weight if you had used DEX or perhaps CON. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[ghost-angel]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

FRED says Succor works just like Aid' date=' except that it costs less per die and you have to pay END to maintain the boost. No mention of waiving maximum effect limitation. Does 5ER specifically mention that there is no maximum effect limitation on Succor?[/quote']

I even referenced a page in my next post after that .... as everyone else said: yes, 5ER states there is no maximum.

 

However, you have to keep applying Succer (Attack Action) thus every application costs END: 1st Succor = 4 END, 2nd Succor = 4 + 4 END, etc...

[Zed-F]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

So to prove your point you use a Characteristic that half the people here think is undercosted for the benefit it gives. (8^D)

 

It would have held more weight if you had used DEX or perhaps CON. (8^D)

Doesn't really affect the argument -- the actual benefit of the figureds relative to other characteristics is a side point (or a point of a different argument altogether.) The fact that it has figureds at all, which the succor and aid don't, is sufficient for this discussion.

 

Besides, he says he's trying to model Hulk, so... there you go.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

As an option for Aid, GM's can allow characters to buy a slightly different form of the Power known as Succor...

 

To add more points, the character has to use an Attack Action, roll the dice again, and pay more END. As long as he keeps succeeding with his Attack Rolls, the character can keep adding effect [sic] this way without worrying about the maximum effect rules for regular Aid.

 

(from H5R p. 134, Aid)

 

The next paragraph goes to say that Aid can be used with the Continuous Advantage, in which case the Aid-ed character points accumulate until the maximum effect is reached, after which any further Aids simply offset the "fade" of the Aid.

 

This +1 Advantage allows a character to use an Attack Power (or other Instant Power) on a continuing basis without having to make a new Attack Roll every Phase against the same target.

 

(from H5R p. 257, Duration Advantages)

 

So in a nutshell, yes, you can create a Continuous Succor, if the GM permits it ("As an option for Aid, GM's can allow...").

 

(This was annoying to look up, because a) Succor isn't listed under Succor in the Powers, it's listed under Aid, and Continuous isn't listed under Continuous in the Advantages, it's listed under Duration Advantages. If it weren't for the index, H5R would be almost unusable. As it is, the index makes no distinction between the page on which Continuous is actually defined and the other half-dozen places it's mentioned. Between H5R's poor organization, poor print quality, and repulsive paper, H6 can't come along soon enough for me....)

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

The problem is that it's virtually impossible for me to think of a way to use this that isn't abusive.

 

I would call that a piloting error, not an engineering error.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

(This was annoying to look up' date=' because a) Succor isn't listed under Succor in the Powers, it's listed under Aid, and Continuous isn't listed under Continuous in the Advantages, it's listed under Duration Advantages. If it weren't for the index, H5R would be almost unusable. As it is, the index makes no distinction between the page on which Continuous is actually defined and the other half-dozen places it's mentioned. Between H5R's poor organization, poor print quality, and repulsive paper, H6 can't come along soon enough for me....)[/quote']

It's just organized differently that you would do it. I have no problems finding anything in the book.

 

Succor is Aid. Just a variation on.

 

As for the comments on the rest of the book ... print quality is good in my book, nothing wrong with the paper I see.

 

Relax ... I'm sure if you have problem with a rule or reconciling something or other asking Steve will yield the appropriate page number. Or the boards, some of us have little trouble finding what we need in 5ER.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

You are wrong in just about every quantifiable way, "ghost-angel", but this is not the best venue to beat this particular dead horse, so I'll let it slide.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

You are wrong in just about every quantifiable way' date=' "ghost-angel", but this is not the best venue to beat this particular dead horse, so I'll let it slide.[/quote']

wow. yeah. these are opinions and as such can't be "wrong." I'm not going to let it slide, you're rude, I'm trying to be constructive and helpful, You're nothing but spiteful and antagonistic. Grow up. I find nothing wrong with the book, how it's organized, the paper it's printed on or the quality of the pring itself. How I can be wrong on my view of it I'm not sure, I have no problems with you not likeing it.

 

I did state if you were having trouble finding something you could ask and plenty of people would be willing to help. Really.. chill.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Hmm. I've got to say I think 5E was bound with much higher quality than 5ER. I hope they can drop some of the unnecessary and overcomplicated filler and go back to such a great quality book for future editions.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Suppose I don't think Aid should be the gold standard here -- which I don't. Suppose I think the cost of the characteristic being boosted should be the gold standard.

 

+20 STR -- you have the full benefit immediately, all the time, plus figureds to boot. Costs 20 AP.

 

1d6 Aid STR, bought up to a max aid of 20 STR -- You have to start the power and keep using attack actions to get it up to 20 over the course of several phases. Once it starts to fade, you have to keep using the power (and attack actions) to keep yourself boosted. It's vastly inconvenient and gives you no figureds. Costs 17 AP.

 

1d6 Succor STR, Continuous, Costs END to Activate, with a cap of 20 STR applied -- You still get no figureds, you still get access to your STR slowly, and now you have to pay a 1 END maintenance cost just to have the power running, on top of the cost of using the STR. Moreover, if you get stunned, it shuts down and you have to start over again, plus the power is visible. It's clearly not nearly as good as just buying 20 STR. But, it's a lot more usable than the Aid, and at 11 AP, the cost relative to buying STR straight up seems reasonable.

 

There are also benefits to Aid and Succor which you have not mentioned. In Heroic camnpaigns, they avoid the NCM doubling restriction. The major one, however, is that they can be used on any number of people.

 

I agree, however, that Aid or Succor with the limitation "self only", priced at -1/2, is vastly inferior to just buying the stat. 5d6 Standard Effect Aid (50 AP) on Self Only requires 2 attack actions to use to full effect, plus one further attack action each turn to maintain, and costs 33 points, 3 more than the number of CP it can add. This is objectively inferior in any game where NCM is not applied.

 

Even if NCM does apply, I think buying the stat at double costs is at least of comparable value, but at least that has a subjective element.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Hmm. I've got to say I think 5E was bound with much higher quality than 5ER.

 

I had not intended to post on this subject further in this thread, but lest anyone suggest that I have nothing positive to say about H5R, I should state for the record that the binding on H5R is one of its few physical attributes which I praised (http://www.blackgate.net/blog/index.php/review-hero-system-fifth-edition-revised). I am quite pleased with the binding of H5R.

[GAZZA]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Ah, but there is subjectivity. The math may not be subjective, but the basis you use for comparison certainly is.

 

Suppose I don't think Aid should be the gold standard here -- which I don't. Suppose I think the cost of the characteristic being boosted should be the gold standard.

Succor is a variation of Aid. The choice of "gold standard" is hardly arbitrary. My 5th edition book even marks the entire Succor power as optional.

 

But we will go with your idea for the sake of discussion. I'm going to have to snip fairly harshly here to keep this down to a reasonable length; this is not intended to misquote you, Zed, and I apologise in advance if I inadvertedly do so.

 

+20 STR = 20 AP, 1d6 Aid max 20 17AP, snipped

 

1d6 Succor STR, Continuous, Costs END to Activate, with a cap of 20 STR applied -- You still get no figureds, you still get access to your STR slowly, and now you have to pay a 1 END maintenance cost just to have the power running, on top of the cost of using the STR. Moreover, if you get stunned, it shuts down and you have to start over again, plus the power is visible. It's clearly not nearly as good as just buying 20 STR. But, it's a lot more usable than the Aid, and at 11 AP, the cost relative to buying STR straight up seems reasonable.

Okey dokey. The above power, I agree, is not abusive. It is not, however, the Succor that the 5th edition Revised contains.

 

If Succor has a cap the same way Aid does, then all objections are immediately withdrawn. No issue whatsoever. The problem is that it doesn't.

 

You have, in effect, done what the d20 crowd call "Rule 0"ed the power. Which is great! I totally support that. Use house rules myself. There are essentially two reasons to use house rules. One is that a particular rule while fine in most cases won't work for a given setting. An example of this might be the old "Mystic Masters" setting where all mental powers were doubled in effectiveness. The other reason is that the rule itself is (in the opinion of the GM, at least) broken or illogical, and the house rule is intended to "patch" the system as a whole.

 

You can't have a system that will be free of the first kind of house rules - at least not if the system is in any way generic. It may not be possible to eliminate the second class of house rules in practice, either - but at least that is possible in theory. The second class of house rules point to problems with the original system - again, at least in the opinion of the GM.

 

I'd argue that the one whose cost is out of line here is Aid, not Succor. To be blunt, Aid sucks. The entire basis of your argument is that Succor costs less than Aid. So what? I consider that a feature, not a defect.

No no, that's not the point of my argument exactly. I do see how it can be read that way.

 

The point of my argument is that Continuous Succor (and incidentally Continuous Suppress) is, IMHO, a broken construct. There are several reasons why.

 

Firstly, it's illogical in the first place to apply Continuous to what is already a constant power. I understand what they were trying to achieve here. Presumably the intent was to create an advantage that would remove the requirement to spend a half phase attack action each phase to keep the power running, but without the complete divorce of the power from the character implied by Uncontrolled. That's fine - I can see a use for that - but it's not what Continuous implies. I don't know a good word for the advantage, though, off hand (it is too bad that Uncontrolled already means something different).

 

Secondly, in the specific case of Suppress and Succor, adjustment powers without upper limits are very dangerous. Of all the "normal" adjustment powers, only Drain has no upper limit, and that is because you always recover from Drain. It is true that you can move the recovery period down to the point where it is effectively "destroyed", but this gets very expensive, Healing can repair the damage, and in any case that's always been something more likely to be abused by NPCs than PCs (as is the case with all long term effects) - and presumably the GM won't abuse things.

 

Why bring up Aid at all then? Because it is the "grandfather" power of which Succor is only a variant. You say yourself that by comparison Aid sucks. This is a clear indication that something is wrong. You're pointing the finger at Aid being out of whack here - but the unlimited nature of Succor leads me to draw the opposite conclusion.

Let's look at (A) 4d6 Suppress vs. ( 2d6 Continuous Suppress where both are repeatedly attacking the same target.

Phase 1: A - 4d6, 2 END; B - 2d6, 2 END

Phase 2: A - 8d6, 4 END; B - 6d6, 6 END

Phase 3: A - 12d6, 6 END; B - 12d6, 12 END

 

Ah, but the Continuous Suppress doesn't require you to keep hitting your target. In a typical game, you can expect to miss (especially with a ranged power) at least 1/3 of the time against reasonable opposition.

 

OK, fair enough, let's apply No Range Penalty (+1/2) and AE: One Hex (+1/2) to minimise that chance. Now the 2d6 version is only 30 Active Points and the 4d6 version is 40 Active Points. To put it another way: the 2d6 version has "room" to shove in another +1 worth of advantages (eg suppressing 4 powers at once) and it will still catch up to the 4d6 version in 3 phases.

 

Yes, the continuous suppress will eventually outpace the regular suppress, but by the time it does, the target probably won't have anything left to suppress anyway.

Assuming it is one target. You can quite easily make the three attacks above at different targets without changing any of your conclusions. You might well have reduced a single target to ineffectiveness in 3 phases; it is unlikely (given decent opposition) that you will do so to 3 different targets. By my calculations, by the end of Phase 3 in this case you are looking at target A having lost 6d6, target B 4d6, and target C 2d6 (obviously for the continuous version; the 4d6 Suppress has applied 4d6 to each of them).

 

Plus, any power defense at all will hose the continuous suppress, and the END costs rapidly get prohibitive.

Well, sure. But you are quoting a 20 active point power; in a campaign where the DC limits are that low, I doubt you're going to see any power defense. And Suppress special effects are often the sort that can easily justify Continuing Charges.

 

Perhaps I can put it another way. Forget what I'm saying about it being abusive and let's accept your initial proposition that you can get the same effect just by attacking again with Suppress. If that is really true, then why do we need Continuous Suppress?

 

One further note: there seems to be a problem here with a disconnect between Constant powers and Instant-Made-Constant powers. If I create a Continuous Energy Blast, for example, I have to spend a half phase attack action each phase to keep it on target. (Continuous basically just means I don't have to make the attack roll more than once). I am assuming you're right here in your implication that this isn't the case with attack powers that are naturally Constant such as Suppress.

 

However, since the way Succor is described in FRED and from the apparent "official" answer that it is an "inverted Suppress", then this would mean that Succor is also a Constant power that needs no further attention other than END. If true, then there is no need for Continuous on it to immediately become abusive. I Succor myself for 4d6 Str in my first phase, Succor myself again in the second phase and pay the END to keep the first one going, and so forth... this is basically exactly what you are doing with Suppress above.

 

I have a suspicion that Constant powers are subject to the same "must spend a half phase attack action" rule that Continuous powers are. If that's true, then your above 4d6 Suppress can't attack twice without releasing the first attack (but the Continuous version can...)

 

That's not proving anything. You wouldn't allow a limitless Aid that boosts all your powers either, now would you. Just use a little GM common sense.

But I don't have to use common sense for Aid. The rules prohibit it. You cannot have a +1 or greater advantage on Aid and still get a workable infinite loop.

 

As I point out above - the fact that I can disallow abusive constructs cannot be used to demonstrate that they are not abusive. If anything, it is evidence in favour of their abusive nature.

 

You need GM control for everything; all powers can be abused if you take them to their illogical extremes.

Why bother having rules, then?

 

Of course you can (and should!) change them to suit yourself. But that doesn't mean that it's excusable to have bad rules - it's still a fault, no matter how easy it is to ignore.

 

You can abuse Aid just as easily as you can abuse Succor, the only difference is how many points you need to spend to do it.

How, exactly? I'm not denying that you can abuse Aid, but it is far trickier to do so, and cannot be done "just as easily".

 

And in any case - two wrongs do not make a right. Infinite loops should be excised from the game for all powers. Succor only gets special attention because it is so trivially easy to construct such loops with them - if it were "just as easy" with Aid, then Succor would never have even been mentioned on the thread.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

I think Aid was bounced up so drastically in cost for 5E because it used to be abused a bit. But two things were done where only one was likely necessary:

1. The cost of Aid was doubled.
   
2. Aid now always Fades, and Healing is required to fully restore traits that are below their starting values

If only one of these changes had been made, I think Aid would be fairly decent for its cost. No longer horribly underpriced, but not the almost laughable waste of points it seems to be now (not that I don't buy it; I like to do the right thing for the concept, not just count points).

[GAZZA]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Well, the munchkin in me seems that this is not too horrible. I mean, I can use:

 

60 Multipower (60 point reserve) "4th Ed Aid"

6-u 2d6 Aid, all characteristics (+2) [or whatever]

6-u 4d6 Healing , all Characteristics (+2) [or whatever]

 

Basically for 20% increase in cost you can get Healing and Aid again. I can live with that.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

Well, the munchkin in me seems that this is not too horrible. I mean, I can use:

 

60 Multipower (60 point reserve) "4th Ed Aid"

6-u 2d6 Aid, all characteristics (+2) [or whatever]

6-u 4d6 Healing , all Characteristics (+2) [or whatever]

 

Basically for 20% increase in cost you can get Healing and Aid again. I can live with that.

But it doesn't all come in the same action in this case. If you wanted to get full 4E effect, you would have to do something like buy Healing and Aid Linked together and define them as using the same roll. That way the Healing would take care of all the points up to the normal starting value and the Aid could boost beyond by the difference. You still run into the non-cumulative issue, though (to overcome that I think you would have to buy a lot of Advantages on the Healing so that it is just about instantly repeatable).

[ghost-angel]

Re: Infinite Loops

 

I guess I'm one of the few that think Aid was fixed in 5E and that the 4E construct was terminally broken.