Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

[JDHMorgan2003]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

if i recall correctly, there is also the little thing of tripling the cost of defense powers involved with "Takes No STUN"...that can get very expensive...

 

Shirak the Destructor in C,K,C spent over a hundred points on his PD alone...that can be very balancing when you look at how many points you have to spend...then there was also El Diablo Robotico in M&M...

 

sorry, C,K,C - conquerors, killers and crooks

m&m - Masterminds & Madmen

[Lucius]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

I have but I always was bugged by hit locations for groups.

 

3-5: Hit the head librarian

6-7: Hit a secretary librarian

8-12: Hit a standard scholar

13-14: Hit an new initiate

15-18: Hit a visitor to the library

 

 

So I make called shots whenever possible for the head librarian.

 

????

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The head librarian is putting up a "No Palindromedaries Allowed" sign.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

According to the game paradigm' date=' Int does not imply a mind, merely the ability to act on and process information. Computers have an Int. That's why AI's have an Ego. Also, you cnanot buy up the EGO of a Golem, since they [i']have[/i] no Ego, not a score of 0.

 

Keith "Just saying" Curtis

5ER p457; Automatons have an EGO score of 0. not "no EGO score."

 

it does state it has an EGO of 0 because they have no sentience or will of their own.

[Ndreare]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

????

 

I always thought your name and Palandromedary comments where is reference to the first century pontificator Lucius Cornelius Alexander Polyhistor and his scholarly associates. He was appointed as the head administrator of the Palatine Library which in turn is where I believe the term Palandromedary comes from. I believe the appointment was made by Cesar Augustus but it could have been another Cesar. It was standard in such days for pontificators to hang out in the Areos (arenas) and libraries pontificating. And his associates who were all scholars. Was I wrong? Are you referring to Lucius Alexander Twilight?

 

So that was the angle my joke was heading towards. But the rule is if I have to explain it, then it was not funny.

 

The head librarian is putting up a "No Palindromedaries Allowed" sign.

 

Of course who then would maintain and use the library? (Libraries where also only for nobles and scholars and not for the common men in those days.)

[keithcurtis]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

5ER p457; Automatons have an EGO score of 0. not "no EGO score."

 

it does state it has an EGO of 0 because they have no sentience or will of their own.

 

Well, alright then.

 

Keith "standing mostly corrected" Curtis

[prestidigitator]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

I have made a couple shapeshifters with the "No Hot Location" power....

That's Invisibility to Infrared Perception, right?

[Markdoc]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

Well, alright then.

 

Keith "standing mostly corrected" Curtis

 

New with 5th - you are right, prior to 5th, Automatons had no EGO score, implying no way to buy it up.

 

Cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

For me, I generally do not allow automaton powers, although the only really nasty one is "takes no stun".

 

Th reasons are:

 

1. The DEF rule - tripling costs. Are your players who want this power happy with paying triple for their defences, and getting their EGO dropped to 0 (for no points back) as well?

2. Genre stuff - robotic/synthetic characters in comics and movies seem to be able to be stunned, or even put temporarily out of action if hit hard enough - it's just generally that they are bricks and therefore have to be hit very ard to have this effect. See, for example, the bad terminator smacking Arnie's terminator in the head with some heavy machinery - he certainly behaved like he was getting stunned. Nothing says a solid whack won't temporarily affect a positronic brain as easily as it does an organic one.

3. As already noted, "takes no stun" and immunity to mental powers really limits the GM's options to killing, entangling or dismembering the character if he wants to throw him a challenge. That's not ideal.

 

The ability to take a lickin' and keep on tickin' does not mean "takes not sun" - it could just as easily be "High Def" and is usually better built that way. Likewise the ability to lose limbs or even most of the body without longterm harm does not necessarily mean "Takes no stun" or "Does not bleed" - it could just as easily be a special effect on regeneration. And again, it's probably better built that way.

 

Takes no stun, in particular, is a handy GM tool, not a stop power because it's an absolute in a system that generally does not allow absolutes.

 

That said, as a GM, you can always allow it - just don't expect sympathy when it turns out to have been a really, really bad idea. Also, don't under any circumstances, allow the player with it to take regeneration - I'm serious about that

 

cheers, Mark

[Lucius]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

I always thought your name and Palandromedary comments where is reference to the first century pontificator Lucius Cornelius Alexander Polyhistor and his scholarly associates. He was appointed as the head administrator of the Palatine Library which in turn is where I believe the term Palandromedary comes from. I believe the appointment was made by Cesar Augustus but it could have been another Cesar. It was standard in such days for pontificators to hang out in the Areos (arenas) and libraries pontificating. And his associates who were all scholars. Was I wrong? Are you referring to Lucius Alexander Twilight?

 

So that was the angle my joke was heading towards. But the rule is if I have to explain it, then it was not funny.

 

 

 

Of course who then would maintain and use the library? (Libraries where also only for nobles and scholars and not for the common men in those days.)

 

Perhaps not funny, but certainly fascinating. As it happens I do know of Lucius C.A. Polyhistor (And wasn't he called Polyhistor because he had written more than one work on history?) but my namesake is actually Lucius Apuleis, who wrote The Golden *** (well, HE called it "Metamorphoses" but later generations called it The Golden ***.) I'm flattered you should associate me with Polyhistor though.

 

I don't know any Lucius Alexander Twilight.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary derives its name from combining the words palindrome and dromedary - take a look at my avatar.

[Lucius]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

For me, I generally do not allow automaton powers, although the only really nasty one is "takes no stun".

 

The reasons are:

 

1. The DEF rule - tripling costs. Are your players who want this power happy with paying triple for their defences, and getting their EGO dropped to 0 (for no points back) as well?

 

3. As already noted, "takes no stun" and immunity to mental powers really limits the GM's options to killing, entangling or dismembering the character if he wants to throw him a challenge. That's not ideal.

 

cheers, Mark

 

While much of what you say has great validity, I must point out two errors.

 

Taking the Takes No Stun power neither drops EGO to 0, nor grants immunity to mental powers. Having no EGO (or EGO of zero) and no self-will is an effect of being an automaton - it is entirely possible to be an automaton and NOT have Takes No Stun, and if a player character is being allowed to take Takes No Stun, I would think it obvious that the player character is not an automaton - unless the player wants to have literally no choices about how the character is played.

 

Further, even if we are talking about an actual automaton, it is not necessarily "immune" to mental powers. An automaton can still be effected by mental powers that target the "machine class of minds" or "undead class of minds" or "insectoid alien class of minds" or whatever class the person running the game decides would apply.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary class of minds - because it's in a class by itself.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

While much of what you say has great validity, I must point out two errors.

 

Taking the Takes No Stun power neither drops EGO to 0, nor grants immunity to mental powers. Having no EGO (or EGO of zero) and no self-will is an effect of being an automaton - it is entirely possible to be an automaton and NOT have Takes No Stun, and if a player character is being allowed to take Takes No Stun, I would think it obvious that the player character is not an automaton - unless the player wants to have literally no choices about how the character is played.

 

Further, even if we are talking about an actual automaton, it is not necessarily "immune" to mental powers. An automaton can still be effected by mental powers that target the "machine class of minds" or "undead class of minds" or "insectoid alien class of minds" or whatever class the person running the game decides would apply.

I was gonna say pretty much the same thing, but Lucius here beat me to it. But yeah, taking an Automaton Power doesn't turn the character into an Automaton.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary class of minds - because it's in a class by itself.

I do believe the Palindromedary ditched class, which would explain why it is, litterally, out of its mind.

[Markdoc]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

I was gonna say pretty much the same thing' date=' but Lucius here beat me to it. But yeah, taking an Automaton Power doesn't turn the character into an Automaton..[/quote']

 

 

OK, I guess we differ there - the only way I allow automaton powers into my game is for automatons. End of discussion.

 

Anything else is (IMO) simply a robotic/undead/whatever character and is built like any other character.

 

Now that doesn't actually rule out the use of automaton powers by players (that's why I wrote "generally"). Summoned creatures or constructs can have it and I have even allowed a player to have the power (built as a "raging berserk" spell) - but only with the clear understanding that while the automaton powers were in effect the character *was* an automaton, and was played as an NPC with limited input from the player. In other words, wind him up and let him go - he'll try to complete his "task" according to his preset instructions, without any deviations until the task is completed, he dies or the spell ends. In that case the character's defences dropped by 2/3 to simulate the fact that completeing his task tok higher priority than trying to evade damage or moving so as to favour any injuries - he just plowed through whatever came his way.

 

I'd be very, very leery of giving such a nasty, cheap power to a player without corresponding limitations: we've had multiple bad experiences with "Takes no Stun" from the GM who trashed our hero team with his first Robots (only the team brick could hurt them and then only with a haymaker - and the GM wondered why we were pissed) to my own experience designing a robot character who took no stun - he was perfectly capable of taking on 5 other combat-oriented PCs and beating the tar out of them - even paying three times for Defences (that's where the comment about regeneration comes from )

 

cheers, Mark

[Ndreare]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

That's Invisibility to Infrared Perception' date=' right? [/quote']

Yep, my bad. Now all I have to do is get the entire board to crash so we can remove any evidence of me making this mistake.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

OK, I guess we differ there - the only way I allow automaton powers into my game is for automatons. End of discussion.

 

Anything else is (IMO) simply a robotic/undead/whatever character and is built like any other character.

 

Now that doesn't actually rule out the use of automaton powers by players (that's why I wrote "generally"). Summoned creatures or constructs can have it and I have even allowed a player to have the power (built as a "raging berserk" spell) - but only with the clear understanding that while the automaton powers were in effect the character *was* an automaton, and was played as an NPC with limited input from the player. In other words, wind him up and let him go - he'll try to complete his "task" according to his preset instructions, without any deviations until the task is completed, he dies or the spell ends. In that case the character's defences dropped by 2/3 to simulate the fact that completeing his task tok higher priority than trying to evade damage or moving so as to favour any injuries - he just plowed through whatever came his way.

 

I'd be very, very leery of giving such a nasty, cheap power to a player without corresponding limitations: we've had multiple bad experiences with "Takes no Stun" from the GM who trashed our hero team with his first Robots (only the team brick could hurt them and then only with a haymaker - and the GM wondered why we were pissed) to my own experience designing a robot character who took no stun - he was perfectly capable of taking on 5 other combat-oriented PCs and beating the tar out of them - even paying three times for Defences (that's where the comment about regeneration comes from )

 

cheers, Mark

There's a difference between paying x3 for defenses and all defenses are cut by 1/3. Defenses should be looked at like any other Power to determine effectiveness, by it's Active Points. If the campaign says that a 30 PD is really high, then a 10 PD is really high for a character with Takes No STUN (it's worth the exact same points). I'm under the impression that the characters you use for examples weren't built with this in mind.

 

Other than that, I suppose the only thing we'd disagree on is whether or not a non-automaton can take Automaton Powers. I don't see any reason why a regular character should be barred from things like Does Not Bleed or No Hit Locations. There no other way to simulate these abilities with other Powers (a funky Healing build comes close for Does Not Bleed and even costs less). Cannot Be Stunned can just be buying a lot of CON with a Limitation (assumng it's a -2 Lim that's +23 CON, usually more than enough in most campaigns). Even Takes No STUN can be "simulated" by buying a combination of extra CON with a Lim and a boatload of extra STUN. It's gonna cost a lot more, but you get a LOT of extra STUN is you also reduce all the character's defenses to 1/3. Not nearly as abolute as the Automaton Powers, but they could functionally be identical. And as I said, No Hit Locations is unique; there is no other way to buy it. As far as I'm concerned, it should be available to all characters, including vehicles.

[Ndreare]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

Perhaps not funny, but certainly fascinating. As it happens I do know of Lucius C.A. Polyhistor (And wasn't he called Polyhistor because he had written more than one work on history?) but my namesake is actually Lucius Apuleis, who wrote The Golden *** (well, HE called it "Metamorphoses" but later generations called it The Golden ***.) I'm flattered you should associate me with Polyhistor though.

 

I don't know any Lucius Alexander Twilight.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary derives its name from combining the words palindrome and dromedary - take a look at my avatar.

 

I suppose it is possible I was reading to much into it. I was thinking you must have gotten the name palindromedary as an extension of Palantine. Well I guess it all goes to show. I should not try to read so much into things.

[Ndreare]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

There's a difference between paying x3 for defenses and all defenses are cut by 1/3. Defenses should be looked at like any other Power to determine effectiveness, by it's Active Points. If the campaign says that a 30 PD is really high, then a 10 PD is really high for a character with Takes No STUN (it's worth the exact same points). I'm under the impression that the characters you use for examples weren't built with this in mind.

 

Other than that, I suppose the only thing we'd disagree on is whether or not a non-automaton can take Automaton Powers. I don't see any reason why a regular character should be barred from things like Does Not Bleed or No Hit Locations. There no other way to simulate these abilities with other Powers (a funky Healing build comes close for Does Not Bleed and even costs less). Cannot Be Stunned can just be buying a lot of CON with a Limitation (assumng it's a -2 Lim that's +23 CON, usually more than enough in most campaigns). Even Takes No STUN can be "simulated" by buying a combination of extra CON with a Lim and a boatload of extra STUN. It's gonna cost a lot more, but you get a LOT of extra STUN is you also reduce all the character's defenses to 1/3. Not nearly as abolute as the Automaton Powers, but they could functionally be identical. And as I said, No Hit Locations is unique; there is no other way to buy it. As far as I'm concerned, it should be available to all characters, including vehicles.

Well said I pretty much agree. Although I would still say there should not be powers limited to characters/constructs of only a given subset of special effects. Which is ultimately what a limited access set of powers boils down to.

 

Of course I personally think that with rules like “10: Protects Objects Carried†and such even vehicles should be built as characters.

 

With some stream lining HERO has some core enough concepts that everything could be built under a single set of rules. Even Automatons could be built as normal characters and selling their Ego down and adding a Limitation “Must follows X ordersâ€

[Lucius]

Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

OK, I guess we differ there - the only way I allow automaton powers into my game is for automatons. End of discussion.

 

Well, that does rather end the discussion.

 

All I was doing was pointing out that it’s not taking or not taking the Takes No Stun power that defines something as an automaton, or as NOT an automaton. The reduction in defenses is a direct result of taking the Takes No Stun power; having no EGO (or zero EGO or however it’s defined under this dispensation) is not, it’s the result of defining a character as “an automaton.â€

 

Anything else is (IMO) simply a robotic/undead/whatever character and is built like any other character.

 

Now that doesn't actually rule out the use of automaton powers by players (that's why I wrote "generally"). Summoned creatures or constructs can have it and I have even allowed a player to have the power (built as a "raging berserk" spell) - but only with the clear understanding that while the automaton powers were in effect the character *was* an automaton, and was played as an NPC with limited input from the player. In other words, wind him up and let him go - he'll try to complete his "task" according to his preset instructions, without any deviations until the task is completed, he dies or the spell ends. In that case the character's defences dropped by 2/3 to simulate the fact that completeing his task tok higher priority than trying to evade damage or moving so as to favour any injuries - he just plowed through whatever came his way.

 

Interestingly enough, I’ve built a set of berserker powers around Takes No Stun too. The reduction in defenses makes a certain sense then. I never defined the berserker as “an automaton†though, although a berserker’s choices are rather severely restricted. As I conceived it, a berserker is still vulnerable to mental powers and even PRE attacks – sure, it would take a powerful effect, but it’s possible. And if you’re using Mental Illusions, for example, I don’t think the berserker is even that much more resistant….maybe less. They’re not exactly thinking deeply about what they’re seeing or if it makes sense.

 

I'd be very, very leery of giving such a nasty, cheap power to a player without corresponding limitations: we've had multiple bad experiences with "Takes no Stun" from the GM who trashed our hero team with his first Robots (only the team brick could hurt them and then only with a haymaker - and the GM wondered why we were pissed) to my own experience designing a robot character who took no stun - he was perfectly capable of taking on 5 other combat-oriented PCs and beating the tar out of them - even paying three times for Defences (that's where the comment about regeneration comes from )

 

cheers, Mark

 

 

You think that’s bad – try giving an automaton both Takes No Stun and Damage Reduction 50%

 

Yep, my bad. Now all I have to do is get the entire board to crash so we can remove any evidence of me making this mistake.

 

I had to laugh. I know the feeling.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I do believe the Palindromedary ditched class, which would explain why it is, litterally, out of its mind.

 

So that’s why I can’t effect the palindromedary with mental powers – it has no class! Like the Hero System itself. No levels either, except skill levels.

 

I suppose it is possible I was reading to much into it. I was thinking you must have gotten the name palindromedary as an extension of Palantine. Well I guess it all goes to show. I should not try to read so much into things.

 

Most people don’t even try to hazard a guess. This is an ingenious derivation. I suppose in that case it would come out meaning something like “That which runs (around? to? from? to and from?) the palace.â€

[keithcurtis]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

OK' date=' I guess we differ there - the only way I allow automaton powers into my game is for automatons. End of discussion.[/quote']

Well then you shouldn't have started discussing, since letting non-automatons have automaton powers was the point posited in the first post.

 

As already noted' date=' "takes no stun" and immunity to mental powers really limits the GM's options to killing, entangling or dismembering the character if he wants to throw him a challenge. That's not ideal.[/quote']

Immunity to mental powers aside, which is entirely different from "takes no stun", you could also grab the character (not the same as an entangle). One of the things I did when creating automaton-like characters for the Savage Earth, was to put hard restrictions on their DEF and STR. These have crept up a bit, due to player whining , but essentially, I don't allow PC "animates" who are combat monsters. If a player really wants one, I make it very clear that they have reduced options when it comes to opposition. Loss=Death in many cases.

Other controls: use the automaton rules for losing body. Every time they take body, have them lose a limb or ability.

 

Keith "Grab him and put a bag over his head" Curtis

 

 

PS. Actually, as the years have progressed, I have been tempted to re-write some of my Animate rules. I like the idea of them being stunned, but not able to be knocked out (like the Terminator referenced above). I guess they could have a Con score, but no Stun. That's a pretty extensive re-write, though, since I also don't allow them END or REC.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

So that’s why I can’t effect the palindromedary with mental powers – it has no class! Like the Hero System itself. No levels either' date=' except skill levels.[/quote']

Well, don't invite it to the Grand Ball, then. Things could get embarrassing with all the nobility about (not that they have half as much class as they pretend, but with them you never go pointing it out or anything; lacks class, you know).

[casualplayer]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

The biggest problem with the Automaton powers, like all the other fixed cost abilities in HERO, is that the starting character point amounts have escalated. When you were a 250 pt hero there was no way on God's green earth that you were going to drop 60 cp on Takes No STUN and then have to pay triple for defenses. At 350 pts it can be tempting. At 500+ it can be start to be a no-brainer because you have enough points to work around the drawbacks. Huge flaw in the system that should have been cleared out with 5th Ed or 5.1 Ed.

 

STUN does not just represent hydrostatic shock or whacking your thumb with a hammer. If a jostle rattles your chips or brings on the blue screen of death, then you take STUN. Look how often Robocop had to reboot. The Metal Men often took STUN, and could regenerate back from the dead (in Magnus' lab) as long as their Responsometers didn't get busted. I think, in fact, they experimented with the idea of buying their REC Only in Dr. Magnus' lab. Go figure.

 

Automaton powers were a bad idea, and powers that are GM's Option Only rarely stay that way for long. Mumble, mumble, razzin' frazzin' Damage Reduction, grumble, grumble....

[ghost-angel]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

The biggest problem with the Automaton powers' date=' like all the other fixed cost abilities in HERO, is that the starting character point amounts have escalated. When you were a 250 pt hero there was no way on God's green earth that you were going to drop 60 cp on Takes No STUN and then have to pay triple for defenses. At 350 pts it can be tempting. At 500+ it can be start to be a no-brainer because you have enough points to work around the drawbacks. Huge flaw in the system that should have been cleared out with 5th Ed or 5.1 Ed.[/quote']

Automatons are listed under Equipment in the book. Meaing they specifically ARE NOT intended for PCs to have those powers.

 

So all that above: moot point. there's nothing to work around.

 

5ER p458 "PCs cannot purchase Automaton Powers."

 

Nothing to fix. Nothing to clear out. If a GM wants to allow a PC to have Automaton Powers any imbalances or issues he brings into his game are his to resolve not the systems.

[Markdoc]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

Well then you shouldn't have started discussing' date=' since letting non-automatons have automaton powers was the point posited in the first post. [/quote']

 

Well, I have to point out I said "in my game". I'm quite happy to discuss it here on the boards where it's safe. I simply wouldn't discuss it with my players - unless someone here makes a brilliant point which changes my perspective (don't laugh - it's happened)

 

cheers, Mark

[Lucius]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

The biggest problem with the Automaton powers' date=' like all the other fixed cost abilities in HERO, is that the starting character point amounts have escalated. When you were a 250 pt hero there was no way on God's green earth that you were going to drop 60 cp on Takes No STUN and then have to pay triple for defenses. At 350 pts it can be tempting. At 500+ it can be start to be a no-brainer because you have enough points to work around the drawbacks. Huge flaw in the system that should have been cleared out with 5th Ed or 5.1 Ed. ....[/quote']

 

You have a point here. It also applies to Damage Reduction (even more so) and Desolidification.

 

 

STUN does not just represent hydrostatic shock or whacking your thumb with a hammer. If a jostle rattles your chips or brings on the blue screen of death' date=' then you take STUN. Look how often Robocop had to reboot. ....[/quote']

 

Kind of what I was saying earlier – just because you’re a “robot†or whatever, doesn’t NECESSARILY mean you shouldn’t be able to take “STUN.â€

 

Automaton powers were a bad idea, and powers that are GM's Option Only rarely stay that way for long. Mumble, mumble, razzin' frazzin' Damage Reduction, grumble, grumble....

 

Now, I don’t think this is quite fair. Even if you think we’d be better off if Takes no Stun had never been invented, is Does not Bleed or No Hit Locations all that bad?

 

Automatons are listed under Equipment in the book. Meaing they specifically ARE NOT intended for PCs to have those powers.

 

So all that above: moot point. there's nothing to work around.

 

5ER p458 "PCs cannot purchase Automaton Powers."

 

Nothing to fix. Nothing to clear out. If a GM wants to allow a PC to have Automaton Powers any imbalances or issues he brings into his game are his to resolve not the systems.

 

Another good point! Give automaton powers to a player and you “void the warranty.†Balance issues become YOUR problem.

 

But we can still discuss problems and solutions here, I hope?

 

Well, I have to point out I said "in my game". I'm quite happy to discuss it here on the boards where it's safe. I simply wouldn't discuss it with my players - unless someone here makes a brilliant point which changes my perspective (don't laugh - it's happened)

 

cheers, Mark

 

Hey, it’s happened to me too.

 

Maybe we can get Keith “I’ve been doing this for years†Curtis to tell us more about how it can be made to work.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Well' date=' don't invite it to the Grand Ball, then. Things could get embarrassing with all the nobility about (not that [i']they[/i] have half as much class as they pretend, but with them you never go pointing it out or anything; lacks class, you know).

 

That’s why Lucius don’t get invited to many balls. He has a compulsion to point out the obvious.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

You have a point here. It also applies to Damage Reduction (even more so) and Desolidification.

 

Now' date=' I don’t think this is quite fair. Even if you think we’d be better off if Takes no Stun had never been invented, is Does not Bleed or No Hit Locations all that bad?[/quote']

 

These suffer from the same issue, however. They cost the same whether your character is built on 50 points or 5,000 points. No Hit Locations, specifically, eliminates the Stun Multiple, something a lot of players would like to do. Actually, using no Hit Locations could form a very effective part of making a character "bulletproof" on a cost-effective basis. [All in games where there is a Stun multiple, of course.]

 

Another good point! Give automaton powers to a player and you “void the warranty.†Balance issues become YOUR problem.

 

While I agree to some extent, given many GM's will build characters (NPC's) on a point basis and use this as a rough guideline for how effective the NPC will likely be, and whether he will be balanced against the PC's, it seems reasonable to expect the cost of these abilities to be reasonably commensurate with their benefits. I've seen nothing that indicates they aren't, although these powers (No Stun in particular) are certainly in the upper echelons of "open to abuse". A stop sign and a warning that this can make a character either undefeatable in combat, or a binary choice of "he's still up" or "he's dead" would be adequate in my view.

 

A GM who would allow "Takes no Stun" without careful consideration also likely allows other troublesome constructs. One might be EDM-UAA, which is book legal, but stop signed. How does our Takes no STUN PC fare against that attack?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Player Characters who might need Automoton Powers

 

Another good point! Give automaton powers to a player and you “void the warranty.†Balance issues become YOUR problem.

 

But we can still discuss problems and solutions here, I hope?

mostly definitely. I just wanted to be perfectly clear that these are not Powers a Player can take, or should take, and thus are not the responsibility of the system to "fix." There's a certain amount of balancing that needs to go on, but not to the extent and worry that Player Available Powers needs to be. IMO.