Luck Options

[Watchman-BN]

One player has asked about buying 10d6 of luck for our supers campaign. He's hoping we can use the optional rule of counting Luck "stun" as points to use for better rolls (rev. p199). On an average roll, that means 35 'action points' across a session.

 

The special effect is that he is a lucky charm for those around him. (and, no, I've no idea how many points he paid for 'magically delicious').

 

He further wanted to use the action points to affect any rolls in the area. So for instance, he could make a villain miss another character or allow another character to make a perception roll.

 

I have a few thoughts, and questions.

 

1) at the least, some sort of 'usable against others' might be necessary.

2) the biggest problem I have is that there is no defense against this. Basically the character can make, at any time, any roll hit or miss, unless I specifically disallow it. Anything without a defense makes me nervous.

3) I realize that the villains could use this as well, but, lets assume I want the game mechanic to work well on its own without using the 'sauce for the goose' method.

 

For comparison sake, I rolled up some negative combat levels, with 30 charges, ranged, & no range mod, and a trigger of 'whenever the character wants to affect a roll'. The character still has to make an attack roll, but the charges, trigger, etc. are kind of bad faith modifiers there to simulate being a luck charm.

 

So,

a) If you use this rule, what adders/advantages, if any, would you require the player to put on his luck to affect any roll in a session?

If you would you not allow this optional rule. Why?

c) If you answer "no" to (, how would you come closest to simulating this power so the player rather than the GM is in charge of when/how to use his luck?

 

Finally, what do you think about this house rule alternative?

 

New Modifier: "Charm Luck" +1/2 advantage to Luck

 

Using Charm Luck is a Zero Phase Action power that costs no end and is visible to mystical sense. The player defines what result he wants from his luck--anything from "the villain misses my teammate" to "we find an important clue". The GM responds with the levels of luck necessary to accomplish the feat, 1,2,3, or 4. Each "situation" can only be affected by a character's luck once. A "situation" is defined by the GM.

[Rubric]

Re: Luck Options

 

As written, the rules aren't clear as to whether the Lucky player can affect only his own rolls, or ALL rolls. In my unrevised book, one sentence says he can change "his" rolls, and another sentence just says he can change "rolls". It's also not clear how "range" affects it. Presumeably, you can only affect things that are within the standard points/inches range, but what does that mean? What is the location of a "roll"?

 

However, I think a major use for this variant of luck is to reduce attack rolls or damage rolls of enemies. So, that capability should be included in the power at its base level (no advantages).

 

I might do it like this:

Base level: the player can alter any dice that he personally rolls, and he can alter dice of any roll that directly affects him (an attack roll or damge roll against his character).

Some advantage: the player can alter any roll, even if it doesn't directly affect him.

Some limitation: the player can only change his own dice, not those rolled by enemies, even if the enemy is targetting the player.

 

I'm not sure how much the advantage should be. A literal reading of the "Useable on Others" rule makes it sound like you need +1 Useable as Attack AND +1/2 ranged. That seems excessive to me, but any lower advantage seems to imply that the person you're using it on gets to control it, and that's not the effect we're looking for. Obviously the villian is not going to voluntarily reduce his attack roll. Also it's not the way the base power works.

 

I would probably just go with a net +1, instead of 1.5. That includes "ranged", and I would rule that the target OR the attacker (but not both) needs to be in range. I also noticed that the Useable as Attack description says that you must define a common set of circumstances that negates the attack -- so that could be the "defense" you were looking for.

 

 

As for whether I would use the optional rule -- I would certainly try it. But, I would probably tell the player ahead of time that we may have to nerf his character if it doesn't work out. The problem with it is that it limits the GM, because everything has to be a dice roll or else the player will feel cheated. Sometimes the GM just wants to say "Okay, that attack missed" (or whatever), but the Lucky player is going to want to know how much it missed by, etc. I'd still try it though, especially if the overall character concept is interesting.

[Talon]

Re: Luck Options

 

I have never used the rule, and I am a bit concerned about how balanced it is. I would definitely want to playtest it a bit first.

 

My first concern is that some sessions involve more rolls than others. In a session with mostly planning and roleplay, there might be just a few rolls, on which the character could pretty much guarantee success. I'd be inclined to make the pool's duration based on something other than "game session".

 

Secondly, altering the rolls after the fact seems a bit too useful. I would try having alterations before the roll cost 1:1, and after the roll cost more (2:1, maybe).

 

As for working on other characters' rolls...not sure. I'd see how is playtested. Certain types of player could really disrupt the group by messing with other PCs excessively.

[Rubric]

Re: Luck Options

 

I'd be inclined to make the pool's duration based on something other than "game session".

 

Secondly, altering the rolls after the fact seems a bit too useful. I would try having alterations before the roll cost 1:1, and after the roll cost more (2:1, maybe).

 

 

Both are great suggestions.

 

There also need to be some limits on how much a given roll can be changed by. You don't want the player adding all 35 points to a Killing Attack damage roll. "Wow, I didn't think that .22 caliber pistol would kill Superman..."

 

If the player is willing to use significant self-restraint, it won't be a problem. Otherwise, the GM is going to have to really clamp down, and possibly disallow it altogether.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Luck Options

 

One player has asked about buying 10d6 of luck for our supers campaign. He's hoping we can use the optional rule of counting Luck "stun" as points to use for better rolls (rev. p199). On an average roll' date=' that means 35 'action points' across a session.[/quote']

 

Unquestionably, that's a lot of roll modifiers. However, the player has spent 50 points for this ability, assuming "basic luck" with no addons. Is 35 points of die roll changes more valuable than, say, a 10d6 EB or a +25/+25 Force field? I'm not saying the answer to that question is clear. I am saying the player has the right to expect that level of benefit from an expenditure this significant. If you're not comfortable with him having such a significant ability to manipulate probability, then you should probably disallow the power right off the bat.

 

He further wanted to use the action points to affect any rolls in the area. So for instance, he could make a villain miss another character or allow another character to make a perception roll.

 

I have a few thoughts, and questions.

 

1) at the least, some sort of 'usable against others' might be necessary.

 

To me, the basic Luck ability affects the character himself. That would mean rolls he makes himself, and rolls made against him. Expansion of that ability to affect rolls made against others does, to me, go beyond the basic ability.

 

UAA seems reasonable. However, is he really using it "against" anyone? I would have to say no.

 

Area effect, maybe? However, these normally affect everyone in the area at one time, which would imply somehow reducing or enhancing die rolls for everyone in the area all at once, not modifying one die roll at a time.

 

However, can we look to Luck itself for some answers? I don't have the book in front of me, but doesn't the basic "luck" chart provide for extra positive effects extending outwards to allies? This imples a need for more dice to affect allies. Perhaps a reasonable approach, rather than increasing the cost of the dice, would be to increase the number of "luck points" required to alter the results of a die roll not directly affecting the character. Maybe it costs 1.5 or 2 Luck points for every point change to a die roll directly affecting the character's ally, but not himself directly, and a bit more to change a die roll affecting a person who is neither the character nor an ally.

 

Alternatively, perhaps the ability to affect an ally with Luck should be the same as the ability to affect an ally with, say, Missile Deflection. Isn't that just purchasing Range? My gut feel says expanding the ability to spend these limited Luck points for the benefit of others within range is worth about a +1/2.

 

Alternatively, look to Danger Sense (which also has no defense) - it has a series of adders to enhance its effects from "just me" to "worldwide". Maybe similar adders would be appropriate for Luck.

 

2) the biggest problem I have is that there is no defense against this. Basically the character can make' date=' at any time, any roll hit or miss, unless I specifically disallow it. Anything without a defense makes me nervous.[/quote']

 

There is a defense. It is purchasing Luck of your own, limited to "only to cancel luck modifications made against self". It's a rare defense, to be sure, but it's not impossible to "defend" against.

 

There's no real defense against luck in general, either. Your high DCV provides no protection if I keep rolling '3' to hit you. Your 40 defenses are of poor utility against my 12d6 EB if I keep rolling 5 or 6 on every die. A character with a high OCV, who routinely hits the target by 5 or more, will exhaust his reservoir pretty fast if he wants to "luckily" avoid being hit, so his resources are limited.

 

3) I realize that the villains could use this as well' date=' but, lets assume I want the game mechanic to work well on its own without using the 'sauce for the goose' method.[/quote']

 

Fair enough - but let's not throw out the possibility of a very lucky villain altogether.

 

So,

a) If you use this rule, what adders/advantages, if any, would you require the player to put on his luck to affect any roll in a session?

 

I think I would follow the Danger sense model of adders to expand beyond "any die roll that affects me directly".

 

If you would you not allow this optional rule. Why?

 

IF I would not allow this rule (and I'd have to consider it), it would be because I don't want the character having that level of probability manipulation. But for me to make up the results of that much luck on a regular basis would be a pain in the posterior, so I think this is a reasonable approach.

 

c) If you answer "no" to (' date=' how would you come closest to simulating this power so the [i']player[/i] rather than the GM is in charge of when/how to use his luck?

 

Just modifying die rolls might be a Multipower of skill levels. Want to luckily be missed? DCV levels. Want to hit against all odds? OCV levels. Skill levels handle other odd lucky results. Broadening this out, a VPP of "luck effects" could simulate just about anything. The character's ship sinks and he's going to drown? Buy LS: No Need to Breathe with the special effect that the character is trapped within an air pocket created by debris when the ship sank, which will last long enough for him to be rescued.

 

Finally, what do you think about this house rule alternative?New Modifier: "Charm Luck" +1/2 advantage to Luck

 

Using Charm Luck is a Zero Phase Action power that costs no end and is visible to mystical sense. The player defines what result he wants from his luck--anything from "the villain misses my teammate" to "we find an important clue". The GM responds with the levels of luck necessary to accomplish the feat, 1,2,3, or 4. Each "situation" can only be affected by a character's luck once. A "situation" is defined by the GM.

 

It's another approach. I fail to see why it should become visible - not all luck need be mystical in nature. Let the character make it Visible if this limitation is desired, or let the character wanting to perceive it buy a Detect. This also puts control back in the GM's hands, much like Mind Control, where the potential for argument over the appropriate level, and/or what is a "situation", appears. Also, note that the player is well within his rights to ask for a Charm Luck roll for every situation which arises - you have made this an ability that should impact everything around him, rolls permitting.

 

From an overall perspective, if I were to spend 50 points (or 75 points under your Charm Luck ability) on a power, I would expect it to have a fairly regular, fairly significant effect. The "luck points" alternative provides for such an effect, measured on an objective basis and placed under control of the player.

 

I also think I'd be telling the player up front that whatever approach is taken is effectively a playtest. If the ability proves unbalancing, it may be necessary to adjust its cost or disallow it altogether, or alternatively redesign the approach. That cuts both ways - if it's not getting enough bang for the point cost, I'd be inclined to make it cheaper or redesign the approach.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Luck Options

 

The range of luck is 'self' so you cannot use Luck on allies or enemies as a default.

 

You can build luck with range and with UBO or AoE, of course, if you want to.

 

OTOH, when youare talking about adding to skill rolls, 10d6 luck is an expensive way to do it.

 

Here is a construct that would allow 32 rolls a day to be affected, by up to plus or minus 3 (which on a bell curve is quite a lot, if not actually good enough to always guarantee success), and you can use them yourself, boost an ally or affect an enemy.

 

Note that, because they use END, the effects wuold be visible.

 

24: Multipower, 60-point reserve, (60 Active Points); Limited Power Power loses about half of its effectiveness: total charges you can use = 32 (-1); all slots Limited Power Power loses about a third of its effectiveness:luck based (-1/2)

 

3: SLOT 1: +3 Overall, 32 Charges (+1/4), Usable By Other (+1/4), Ranged (+1/2) (60 Active Points); Costs Endurance (-1/2), Limited Power Power loses about a third of its effectiveness:luck based (-1/2)

 

2: SLOT 2: Negative Skill Levels (-3 with Any Skill), 32 Charges (+1/4) (37 Active Points); Limited Power Power loses about a third of its effectiveness:luck based (-1/2)

 

Total: 29 points (60 active) 32 charges total

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Luck Options

 

The more rules-orthodox approach to negatively affecting the rolls of other characters is to use Change Environment, or the optional Negative Skill Levels. These only apply to causing penalties, though; positive benefits would be more the province of Aid, or Skill Levels UBO or UAA.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Luck Options

 

The range of luck is 'self' so you cannot use Luck on allies or enemies as a default.

 

You can build luck with range and with UBO or AoE, of course, if you want to.

 

According to the description of Luck, if you have enough Luck dice to roll four Sixes or more, some of the benefits may "rub off" onto your friends. In the past I've allowed a PC to buy a lot of Luck (IIRC 10 or 12d6) Limited to Others Only, which only works if the player rolls four Sixes or more.

[Watchman-BN]

Re: Luck Options

 

Great thoughts and suggestions, as usual guys. Thanks very much.

 

To crystalize the issues:

1) The player wants the use of luck to be in his control, initiated by him, and a (reasonably) known entity.

2) Luck, as written, is (typically) initiated by the GM asking the player to make a roll. The result is determined by the GM, and the player has to be lucky himself to have the power work (rolling 6's).

3) Specifically, the character wants to affect rolls after the fact, against any target/effect he can perceive (or in his immediate vicinity).

 

Sean's multipower is similar to my alternate build. It has the problem of requiring an attack roll, and all the issues with that (can't abort to it, you can't make the speedster or martial artist unlucky, etc.). But, its valuable for providing a point/cost comparison.

 

All the other ways I've seen of build this either (1) require an attack roll or (2) affect everyone the same basic way--a la change environment giving EVERYONE a -3 OCV

 

Hugh's and Rubrics ideas of adders are really good, and Hugh's comparison to danger sense is apt. One note though: Danger Sense does have defense: Sense affecting powers can render it useless (DK, Flash, Invisibility).

 

So my two hurdles still remain: removing the attack roll, and creating some defense.

 

I have been thinking that Unluck or Luck would be the defense.

 

Example:

The villain BlasterDude (OCV 6) fires at Lucky Charm's teammate, The Incredible Sitting Duck (DCV 6). BlasterDude rolls an 8. BlasterDude has 2d6 of Luck and TISD has 15 pts of Unluck. Lucky Charm wants to turn this hit into a miss.

 

To do this, he has to use luck 'action points' as follows:

4 pts base to turn the 8 into a 12

2 more points to offset BlasterDude's luck

and 3 more points to offset TISD's unluck

for a total of 9 points to make this hit a miss.

 

This way, the power functions basically how the PC wants it to, but it becomes expensive to alter the IMMUTABLE RULES OF FATE for other lucky or unlucky people.

 

Seem reasonable? Better than requiring an adder/advantage to Luck, or would you require both?

[Checkmate]

Re: Luck Options

 

I would expand on Talon's idea.

 

If you want to effect your roll before you actually roll the dice it's 1:1 after you roll the dice 2:1

 

If you want to modify an allies roll before they roll the dice it's 3:1 after the roll it's 6:1

 

If you want to modify an enemies roll before they roll the dice it's 5:1 after they roll it's 10:1

 

Obviously these are just numbers off the top of my head, but gives you something to think about.

[Markdoc]

Re: Luck Options

 

This has come up in the past in our games. The base rule we established was that luck can alter probabilities, but it cannot alter past events.

 

In other words, the player can always use his luck to alter a roll that has not happened yet, but once it is made, it is made. He can't alter that without time travel.

 

This greatly reduces the effect of the power, while still making it useful: you can always decide to drop ±3 or ±4 on the crucial attack roll or dive for cover roll, before it's made and that's usually a big deal. And the player, as described, could do that 10 times in a typical fight, which is a really major effect, even if he can't pick and choose which rolls to affect after the case. And if the player chooses to use it more sparingly, he can more or less guarantee success or failure on 3 or 4 rolls. That's pretty damn powerful, given that he's essentially gaining a whole stack of overall levels with limited usage.

 

cheers, Mark

[Sean Waters]

Re: Luck Options

 

I suppose my main concern with this kind of luck power is that it can change the flavour of a campaign significantly: a team can guarantee (at least a few times per day) accomplishing a task, no matter how impossible.

 

Looking for Dr D's new base?

 

OK, I hack the Pentagon mainframe, take over the satellite network, move them all to point at the city, and have them retuned to pick up the unique microwave emanations of Throbmoanium that the good Doctor always constructs his base from.

 

That's impossible!

 

Actually, no, just really really difficult. A team of hackers given a month to prepare might manage it, but that is just penalties to the roll, and if you have +35, you will get there.

 

...and weeks of careful information gathering and role playing is out the window.

 

I'd seriously consider a cap on the maximum roll adjustment.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Luck Options

 

I would expand on Talon's idea.

 

If you want to effect your roll before you actually roll the dice it's 1:1 after you roll the dice 2:1

 

If you want to modify an allies roll before they roll the dice it's 3:1 after the roll it's 6:1

 

If you want to modify an enemies roll before they roll the dice it's 5:1 after they roll it's 10:1

 

Obviously these are just numbers off the top of my head, but gives you something to think about.

 

I like the idea of an increased cost if you want to modify the roll after seeing what it is. I'm not sure I like the multiples for altering ally/enemy die rolls. Also, should it be based on who rolls the dice, or who is affected? With the above structure, avoiding being hit by reducing the enemy's die roll costs 5:1, but that's a pretty common effect of luck powers in the comics. I'd tentatively go with:

 

- 1:1 to alter die rolls that directly affect the lucky character

 

- 1.5:1 to alter die rolls that directly affect the lucky character's close friends or loved ones

 

- 2:1 to alter die rolls that don't fit one of the above categories

 

- cost doubled to alter a roll the player has already seen (or disallow this altogether, as discussed below).

 

This represents luck becoming more and more consciously directed to help others.

 

This has come up in the past in our games. The base rule we established was that luck can alter probabilities' date=' but it cannot alter [b']past events[/b].

 

In other words, the player can always use his luck to alter a roll that has not happened yet, but once it is made, it is made. He can't alter that without time travel.

 

This greatly reduces the effect of the power, while still making it useful: you can always decide to drop ±3 or ±4 on the crucial attack roll or dive for cover roll, before it's made and that's usually a big deal. And the player, as described, could do that 10 times in a typical fight, which is a really major effect, even if he can't pick and choose which rolls to affect after the case. And if the player chooses to use it more sparingly, he can more or less guarantee success or failure on 3 or 4 rolls. That's pretty damn powerful, given that he's essentially gaining a whole stack of overall levels with limited usage.

 

Another approach would be to require no commitment to the level of alteration up front, but simply to state the character will use luck before the dice are rolled. The character is then committed to use as many luck points as it takes. Villain rolls a '3' and hits by 12? He misses, but it costs you 13 luck points. A couple of other modifiers could include a minimum cost of 1 luck point, even if the roll would have achieved the desired result without any modification (the villain would have missed anyway, for example) and a minimum 1 point cost, rather than draining the remaining pool, in the event the character doesn't have enough luck points to achieve the desired result (eg. the villain hit by 12, but you only have 10 luck points left). There's some similarity to the above and the Marvel Supers Karma system.

 

I suppose my main concern with this kind of luck power is that it can change the flavour of a campaign significantly: a team can guarantee (at least a few times per day) accomplishing a task, no matter how impossible.

 

Looking for Dr D's new base?

 

OK, I hack the Pentagon mainframe, take over the satellite network

 

Roll to hack in. One skill roll.

 

' date=' move them all to point at the city,[/quote']

 

Roll to direct them

 

and have them retuned to pick up the unique microwave emanations of Throbmoanium that the good Doctor always constructs his base from.

 

Roll to retune them

 

That's impossible!

 

Actually, no, just really really difficult. A team of hackers given a month to prepare might manage it, but that is just penalties to the roll, and if you have +35, you will get there.

 

Did you need to roll to locate a computer? Likely not. Did the character have computer skills? Did he have the technical acumen to even try to redirect the satellites? Does he know the signature of Throbmoanium? If not, more penalties. But, with enough points, it can be done, as you say,

 

...and weeks of careful information gathering and role playing is out the window.

 

I'd seriously consider a cap on the maximum roll adjustment.

 

Consideration to the effects of a broad-reaching Luck power have to be considered, no question. But at a 50 point cost, the character could have had 10d6 of Telepathy , horrendous danger sense , a very potent Detect, potent clairsentience and/or retrocognition or any number of other potentially game-breaking powers. The GM always needs to consider the implications. At the same time, I think a player spending 50 points has a right to expect those 50 points to have a pretty significant in-game benefit. If he had a 30d6 Energy Blast, 1 charge (he can only use that 35 point modifier once), that would cost 50 points and have significant game impact when used at the right time.

 

Imposing a maximum on how lucky you can get (a maximum die modifier as Sean suggests) would be one way of reducing the gamebreaking ramifications. You might even give the character a small limitation to reflect this concession he gives in the interest of game balance.

[pinecone]

Re: Luck Options

 

This has come up in the past in our games. The base rule we established was that luck can alter probabilities' date=' but it cannot alter [b']past events[/b].

 

In other words, the player can always use his luck to alter a roll that has not happened yet, but once it is made, it is made. He can't alter that without time travel.

 

This greatly reduces the effect of the power, while still making it useful: you can always decide to drop ±3 or ±4 on the crucial attack roll or dive for cover roll, before it's made and that's usually a big deal. And the player, as described, could do that 10 times in a typical fight, which is a really major effect, even if he can't pick and choose which rolls to affect after the case. And if the player chooses to use it more sparingly, he can more or less guarantee success or failure on 3 or 4 rolls. That's pretty damn powerful, given that he's essentially gaining a whole stack of overall levels with limited usage.

 

cheers, Mark

Yeah, it controlls probability, once the roll is made thats reality controll/manipulation...and before you ask No! nobody gets reality controll!

[pinecone]

Re: Luck Options

 

I suppose my main concern with this kind of luck power is that it can change the flavour of a campaign significantly: a team can guarantee (at least a few times per day) accomplishing a task, no matter how impossible.

 

Looking for Dr D's new base?

 

OK, I hack the Pentagon mainframe, take over the satellite network, move them all to point at the city, and have them retuned to pick up the unique microwave emanations of Throbmoanium that the good Doctor always constructs his base from.

 

That's impossible!

 

Actually, no, just really really difficult. A team of hackers given a month to prepare might manage it, but that is just penalties to the roll, and if you have +35, you will get there.

 

...and weeks of careful information gathering and role playing is out the window.

 

I'd seriously consider a cap on the maximum roll adjustment.

 

I agree...+/- 5 for "reasonable Luck, I'd likely try =/- 10 for supers.....

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Luck Options

 

This character uses the optional Luck rules asked about by the OP. It works very well, and is my preferred method of Luck. The character also has a lot of other Luck SFX powers that you might find interesting, including his signature "Luck Effects" ability built using Duplication for an alternate "non-existent" form that has many luck SFX powers of its own.

 

Blackjack

[rdalton]

Re: Luck Options

 

Here's an alternative option......Buy change environment with vairiable effects. If you want your team to be safe, up your DCV. If you want a bad guy to have a bad day, make the area small but give him a -8 to his OCV.

 

Maybe buy it with invisible power effects with a minor disad 'only affects that can be generated via luck'.

 

It makes the whole thing a lot simpler and the effect is similiar.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Luck Options

 

Here's an alternative option......Buy change environment with vairiable effects. If you want your team to be safe, up your DCV. If you want a bad guy to have a bad day, make the area small but give him a -8 to his OCV.

 

Maybe buy it with invisible power effects with a minor disad 'only affects that can be generated via luck'.

 

It makes the whole thing a lot simpler and the effect is similiar.

 

CE explicitly can't provide beneficial effects, for better or worse.

[rdalton]

Re: Luck Options

 

CE explicitly can't provide beneficial effects' date=' for better or worse.[/quote']

 

What do you mean it can't provide beneficial effects? All powers provide beneficial effects (well, if you are on the right side of them)

 

I am confused though. On p.137 it says:

Positive Effects, Negating other effects

CE cannot provide 'positive effects' or bonuses to any char (other than the beneficial resutl of hindering his enemies). For example, it cannot improve characters OCV or DCV, provide bonuses to characters PER or Skill Rolls or the like.

 

But, that's what the power does, isn't it?

p136 - 5pts for CV (OCV or DCV), 3pts +1 on skill roll.....

 

What am i missing?

[Logan D. Hurricanes]

Re: Luck Options

 

I had an idea about the affecting-rolls effect.

 

+x Overall Levels (Ranged, UBO, etc. to taste)

16 charges, charge is only used if effective (+1/2?)

 

Essentially, you add the levels to an ally's attack roll (frex) and if they succeed naturally, you don't lose a charge. If they fail, but your levels make it into a success, then it costs 1 charge. Ooh! even better: make it boostable charges, then it uses up whatever it needs to make a roll successful.

[Talon]

Re: Luck Options

 

What do you mean it can't provide beneficial effects? All powers provide beneficial effects (well, if you are on the right side of them)

 

I am confused though. On p.137 it says:

Positive Effects, Negating other effects

CE cannot provide 'positive effects' or bonuses to any char (other than the beneficial resutl of hindering his enemies). For example, it cannot improve characters OCV or DCV, provide bonuses to characters PER or Skill Rolls or the like.

 

But, that's what the power does, isn't it?

p136 - 5pts for CV (OCV or DCV), 3pts +1 on skill roll.....

 

What am i missing?

 

If you look at the text on the left on p. 136, all of the effects are minuses, not bonuses.

 

That being said, if the CE is balanced I have no problem ignoring this aspect of CE. When this version of the power was first floating around the net I recall it working both ways.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Luck Options

 

What do you mean it can't provide beneficial effects? All powers provide beneficial effects (well, if you are on the right side of them)

 

I am confused though. On p.137 it says:

Positive Effects, Negating other effects

CE cannot provide 'positive effects' or bonuses to any char (other than the beneficial resutl of hindering his enemies). For example, it cannot improve characters OCV or DCV, provide bonuses to characters PER or Skill Rolls or the like.

 

But, that's what the power does, isn't it?

p136 - 5pts for CV (OCV or DCV), 3pts +1 on skill roll.....

 

What am i missing?

 

All the line items listed for CE are penalties.

 

Why? {shrug} It's just an arbitrary ruling on Steve's part, and he doesnt discuss design decisions like that so unless he changes his mind and discusses this one, we wont ever really know for sure.

 

Presumably he felt it was too unbalancing if bonuses (or "buffs" as some people call them) were allowed via CE, tread to much on the bailiwick of Aid, and / or didn't interact well with one or more other aspects of the game.

 

And its a shame too, because it can be very clumsy to design effects that otherwise would be painfully easy with a CE that granted bonuses. The most immediate and obvious case is that of LIGHT casting, which arbitrarily is "officially" built via IMAGES "Only To Create Light". If instead you could do it with a CE that included bonuses to Normal Sight perception it would IMO make more sense and generally work a lot better.

 

If you as a GM are comfortable w/ CE's that provide bonuses and can arrive at a points ratio that makes sense and works for your games, you can of course do so. However, you should remain aware that your characters using such an ability are in direct violation of one of the few hard design restrictions in the system. If you don't plan to play such characters in other GM's games or publishing them then it really doesn't matter.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Luck Options

 

I had an idea about the affecting-rolls effect.

 

+x Overall Levels (Ranged, UBO, etc. to taste)

16 charges, charge is only used if effective (+1/2?)

 

Essentially, you add the levels to an ally's attack roll (frex) and if they succeed naturally, you don't lose a charge. If they fail, but your levels make it into a success, then it costs 1 charge. Ooh! even better: make it boostable charges, then it uses up whatever it needs to make a roll successful.

It's a different SFX, but

Sybyl of the Violators has UBO OL's (her Guidance powers).