Not Taking Advantage

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Then maybe the rules should be changed so that, by default, you can choose whether or not to use the Advantage, but if you can't choose you get a cost break.

[Tonio]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Then maybe the rules should be changed so that' date=' by default, you can choose whether or not to use the Advantage, but if you can't choose you get a cost break.[/quote']

 

Maybe, but that might be iffy. Some Advantages don't have a negative side to them (Indirect, AE One Hex (Accurate)). Others already offer this option (Autofire, Range), some of them charge you extra for it (Hole In The Middle). For others, they're already at +1/4, so you can't reduce them further (Does Knockback, Personal Immunity). It might also break some Advantages (Megascale).

[Diamond Spear]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Perhaps you could simply require a Power Skill roll at -1 for every 10 active points to allow the character to "turn off" the advantage. Seems like a good use for the skill to me.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

So, wouldn't it be useful, rather than messing with cost, to define a different advantage for a power that has 'fixed' advantages.

 

Say, being harder to drain?

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

So, wouldn't it be useful, rather than messing with cost, to define a different advantage for a power that has 'fixed' advantages.

 

Say, being harder to drain?

 

 

Sean, if you insist on coming up with practical suggestions we are going to have to ban you from the forums or have the doctors come round to visit again...

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

There's a way to do that, at least in 5e (I don't have 5er so I don't know, but it should say on the first page of the Advantages section -- anyone want to confirm or deny it for me?). You can buy a Limited Advantage. Buy your AoE with IIF Magic AoE-Making Thingy. Then, when you throw your Power, you can choose to, or not to, use your Magic AoE-Making Thingy, depending on whether you want your attack to be AoE or not. (For even more weirdness, you could buy several AoE Advantages, each based on a different IIF: Magic AoE-Radius-Making Thingy, IIF: Magic Explosion-Making Thingy, IIF: Magic AoE-Any-Area-Making Thingy, etc., and choose which AoE you want -- but at this point Variable Advantage is cheaper, and don't forget the Awesome Advantage .)

 

(The Limited Advantage method is, as far as I am aware, entirely unsupported in Hero Designer.)

 

I'm pretty sure what you're describing is essentially a form of Naked Advantage which Sean doesn't like for some reason.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

I'm pretty sure what you're describing is essentially a form of Naked Advantage which Sean doesn't like for some reason.

 

It's not. It's a form of Limited Advantage. When I get home I can find the 5e page reference, and someone can use the handy-dandy 5e -> 5er page conversion (probably me) which I have bookmarked at home and can look up myself. When I get home.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

It's not. It's a form of Limited Advantage. When I get home I can find the 5e page reference' date=' and someone can use the handy-dandy 5e -> 5er page conversion (probably me) which I have bookmarked at home and can look up myself. When I get home.[/quote']

 

Well, I'm not sure what section you are referring to since I can't find any mention of a Limited Advantage so I await your reference.

 

In the mean time I was able to find a reference to a Limited Naked Advantage:

 

from Hero System 5th Edition, Revised

96 ■ Character Creation: Powers

 

Example: Howler has a sonic Energy Blast. Since her attack is sound, it wouldn’t work in a vacuum, and would probably work better underwater (perhaps adding 1-2d6 or becoming a small Explosion). The GM might allow her to shatter glass in a room without making an Attack Roll. Generally, these effects are so minor that she doesn’t have to pay for them (nor do they entitle her to a Limitation). If Howler were in a campaign involving frequent adventures in outer space, she could take a Power Limitation on her Energy Blast (Limited Power: Doesn’t Work In A Vacuum, -¼), since a vacuum would be a common occurrence. If she were in a campaign where the characters often ventured underwater, she might have to buy an Advantage to reflect the greater effectiveness of her Energy Blast in such an environment (perhaps Explosion as a naked Advantage with the Limitation, Only Underwater (-1)).

 

This section is new to 5er according to Zornwil's thread below:

 

Okay, I'm doing a few more pages, not so many but at least to plug along a bit...

 

p. 93 => p. 67-68 (just barely, by one line)

p. 94 => p. 68 NEW entire subsection on Active Points and Real Points, and "Compound" Powers

p. 95 => p. 68

p. 96 => p. 70 ENTIRE NEW Special Effects section (major expansion); NEW Special Effects: A Sample List sidebar

p. 97 => NA- no equivalent, I believe NEW subsection Reasoning from Special Effects, major notes

p. 98 => p. 71; NEW Sidebar Power Creation Checklist; NEW Power Descriptions section

p. 99 => p. 69; Duration made a higher-level section, greatly expanded

p. 100 => p. 69

p. 101 => p. 70; NEW Target section

p. 102 => p. 69 NEW entire Endurance Cost section (greatly expanded discussion)

p. 103 => p. 69, p. 71-72

p. 104 => p. 72

p. 105 => p 72-73; Sidebar on p. 73

p. 106 => p. 73

p. 107 => p. 73-74

p. 108 => p. 74

p. 109 => p. 75; NEW section on Characteristics

p. 110 => p. 75

p. 111 => p. 75

p. 112 => p. 75

p. 113 => p. 75-76

p. 114 => p. 76-77

p. 115 => p. 77-78

p. 116 => p. 78

p. 117 => p. 78-79

p. 118 => p. 79-80

p. 119 => p. 80-81

p. 120 => p. 81-82

p. 121 => p. 82

 

That completes through the general section on Mental Powers.

 

That's 20.4%!! We're 1/5 of the way there!!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Sean' date=' if you insist on coming up with practical suggestions we are going to have to ban you from the forums or have the doctors come round to visit again...[/quote']

 

Sorry 'bout that

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

I'm pretty sure what you're describing is essentially a form of Naked Advantage which Sean doesn't like for some reason.

 

Surely not? Me have an opinion? The very thought!

 

I'm really a bit confused as to why we need naked advantages for - well - most if not all of what it is used for. It seems much simpler to define advantages slightly differently i.e. you don;t need to sue them, but there is some advantage if you define the power as having to use them, and just have done. Less column inches, less confusion. Yummy goodness.

[Tonio]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

I think the biggest obstacle to this, Sean, is the fact that some Advantages already include clauses for not using them, and some of those charge you for it.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Well' date=' I'm not sure what section you are referring to since I can't find any mention of a [u']Limited Advantage[/u] so I await your reference.

 

It's on FREd p. 180, which according to Zornwil translates to either p. 280 or 281 in 5er. The section is under Partially Limited Powers; the second portion of that section discusses buying Advantages with Limitations applied to them.

 

Edit: Although it may not be suitable to Sean's needs, at first glance; it does go on to mention that "no matter how much an Advantage is Limited, it increases the Power's END cost (and penalty to any related Skill Rolls) at all times." So with, say, the AoE, Requires BIG Gesture, you'd still pay the END and Skill Roll penalty, whether the AoE was active or not, though you could certainly choose whether or not the Power has an AoE effect at the time you use it. Naked Advantage has the... erm... advantage here.

 

In the mean time I was able to find a reference to a Limited Naked Advantage:

 

from Hero System 5th Edition, Revised

96 ■ Character Creation: Powers

 

 

 

This section is new to 5er according to Zornwil's thread below:

 

That section exists in 5e, almost verbatim; the only difference is the phrase "as a naked Advantage" which isn't in the 5e version. I won't speak to intent, as it obviously has changed between the two editions, but I don't infer from the 5e wording that it necessarily is a naked Advantage.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

So I’ve always been a bit niggled by the fact that' date=' when you buy an advantage, you have to use it, that it locks you in. Now you can get round it (MP With 8d6 EB and an 8d6 EB Explosion), but it is a bit awkward building it that way, and there is the awful temptation to bump the EB up to 12d6 J. The other way you can do it is by buying a naked advantage, but, it seems to me, the main reason for naked advantages existing is to get around this rule. That seems unnecessarily complicated.

 

So, what to do? Here’s how I think I’m going to solve it for me and I’d be chuffed if you’d let me have your thoughts.

 

When you build a power with an advantage, you define if you always have to use that advantage. If you DO, then it forms part of the power, and the active points are included for purposes of drains and other negative adjustment powers. If you DON’T then such powers just affect the base points.

 

Example: 8d6 EB (40 AP) EXPLOSION (60 AP) hit by a 15 point drain,

 

Must use power: 60-15=45 points, and you are left with a 6d6 EB Explosion

 

Don’t have to use power: 40-15=25 points, and you are left with a 5d6 Explosion

 

Basically, if the advantage is NOT an integral part of the power, then it is easier to affect with drain/dispel etc. This would have no effect on positive adjustment powers – you’d need to increase the base power and the advantage even if they were ‘separate’.

 

 

Well, I do respect your opinion in general Sean, but I pretty much have to categorically disagree with you on this one.

 

A) The reasons you site arent the _only_ reason for NPA's. There are a number of interesting build ideas that are only possible with an NPA; having the ability to make them is a good thing.

 

What you describe is essentially just a gimped version of an NPA by a different name.

 

C) If you really don't like the idea of having to use Advantages bought on powers, then just decide to not apply this rule and treat them like Adders. As far as I've been able to tell many people forget / are not aware of the rule anyway. Ultimately if you don't care for it just don't use it. No need to kludge mechanics for it.

[Wayside]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting since naked power advantages can do exactly what you are saying. They can be bought for a single power, at which point they automatically have all the advantages and limitations of the base power. Which as far as I can tell is verbatim what you are talking about. The only difference I see is that you don't want it to be called a naked advantage.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting since naked power advantages can do exactly what you are saying. They can be bought for a single power' date=' at which point they automatically have all the advantages and limitations of the base power. Which as far as I can tell is verbatim what you are talking about. The only difference I see is that you don't want it to be called a naked advantage.[/quote']

 

Maybe it's a British bias towards the use of the word "naked"?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Maybe it's a British bias towards the use of the word "naked"?

 

Surely not! I'm naked as I type!

Well, under the clothes I'm wearing I am

 

I think the problem I have with NPA is that it lacks system definition between different uses.

 

Example: I can buy a AoE Hex Accurate NA to be used with my strength, or with my strength and my energy blast, or with any weapon I pick up and use...and it costs the same, that cost being based solely ont he active points I want to eb able to affect (which in itself doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense in gametime).

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Surely not! I'm naked as I type!

Well, under the clothes I'm wearing I am

 

I think the problem I have with NPA is that it lacks system definition between different uses.

 

Example: I can buy a AoE Hex Accurate NA to be used with my strength, or with my strength and my energy blast, or with any weapon I pick up and use...and it costs the same, that cost being based solely ont he active points I want to eb able to affect (which in itself doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense in gametime).

 

Um....normally you buy an NPA to apply to a specific base power. You would buy AoE 1 Hex Accurate with up to X AP of Y base Power.

 

The GM can opt to be more lenient if they like, but the examples pretty much all go something like "Autofire for up to 60 AP of RKA" or "0 END for up to 50 AP of STR", etc.

 

(Note, Im talking about a base power like RKA or Armor or Telepathy, not an instance of a Power construct like "Fireblast", "Iron Skin", or "Mindscrape"; one is an abstract mechanic with nigh-infinite applications the other is concrete specific ability on a character sheet).

[Kdansky]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

I like NPAs:

 

Evil Thingy That Might Hit You: EB 10d6. AP 50, real cost 50

 

Evil Thingy That Will Hit You But I Can Only Do That So Often: NPA on 50 AP, AoE 1 hex (+1/2), 1 charge (-2), AP 75, real cost 8.

 

total 58 cost.

 

Can't do that clean without NPAs, and MPs are too expensive for this (since you have to make the reserve 75 AP). It's just cheaper and I might allow you to break the usual DC limits there, if you put enough disads onto that NPA.

[JmOz]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

NPA's are a tool, one I dislike using unless I need to.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Um....normally you buy an NPA to apply to a specific base power. You would buy AoE 1 Hex Accurate with up to X AP of Y base Power.

 

The GM can opt to be more lenient if they like, but the examples pretty much all go something like "Autofire for up to 60 AP of RKA" or "0 END for up to 50 AP of STR", etc.

 

(Note, Im talking about a base power like RKA or Armor or Telepathy, not an instance of a Power construct like "Fireblast", "Iron Skin", or "Mindscrape"; one is an abstract mechanic with nigh-infinite applications the other is concrete specific ability on a character sheet).

 

In that use they are not a problem, but I also see them used to add to multiple powers, perhaps powers in a framework (so there is some link), or in heroic games to apply to anything the character picks up that the advantage can apply to (rapidly firing any gun as if it had autofire for example).

 

There is no system differentiation between the uses and that is what makes me uncomfortable.

 

Second point is that, built as a seperate special power, you have the advantage of the advantage (if you see what I mean) without the drawbacks of having to use it, for the same cost as just buying it with the power. I'm not too worried about that as the 'seperate NPA' is generally easier to adjust down. It gets a bit odd when adjusting up though.

 

My vehemence is partly feigned, but I do think that NPAs are not really necessary to build more or less any concept.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

So I’ve always been a bit niggled by the fact that' date=' when you buy an advantage, you have to use it, that it locks you in. Now you can get round it (MP With 8d6 EB and an 8d6 EB Explosion), but it is a bit awkward building it that way, and there is the awful temptation to bump the EB up to 12d6 J. The other way you can do it is by buying a naked advantage, but, it seems to me, the main reason for naked advantages existing is to get around this rule. That seems unnecessarily complicated.

 

So, what to do? Here’s how I think I’m going to solve it for me and I’d be chuffed if you’d let me have your thoughts.

 

When you build a power with an advantage, you define if you always have to use that advantage. If you DO, then it forms part of the power, and the active points are included for purposes of drains and other negative adjustment powers. If you DON’T then such powers just affect the base points.

 

Example: 8d6 EB (40 AP) EXPLOSION (60 AP) hit by a 15 point drain,

 

Must use power: 60-15=45 points, and you are left with a 6d6 EB Explosion

 

Don’t have to use power: 40-15=25 points, and you are left with a 5d6 Explosion

 

Basically, if the advantage is NOT an integral part of the power, then it is easier to affect with drain/dispel etc. This would have no effect on positive adjustment powers – you’d need to increase the base power and the advantage even if they were ‘separate’.

 

I have to agree that the ability to freely swap between an 8d6 EB and an 8d6 Explosion is considerably more valuable than the locked-in 8d6 explosion, even with your adjustment power tweak.

 

One will become a little more useless faster if a drain comes along. The other can be fired at a target grappling your ally with no risk of hurting your ally. I know which one seems more useful to me.

[Diamond Spear]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

So....no love for my idea of using a Power Skill roll to attempt to "turn off" an advantage?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

So....no love for my idea of using a Power Skill roll to attempt to "turn off" an advantage?

 

Not so much 'no love' but it is a solution that can only work as a very occasional fix, and it would be nice to have something a tad more formal.

[Tonio]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

So....no love for my idea of using a Power Skill roll to attempt to "turn off" an advantage?

 

As a standard mechanic, no. I'd be fine with it as an occasional, or one-time, thing. PowerMan tries to focus his normally Explosive EB in order to hit just the Big Bad Villain, sparing innocents around him... roll Power Skill.

[pinecone]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

You can take Variable Advantage. When not using Explosion' date=' you could switch it to AP or 0 END or whatever.[/quote']

 

Thats my usual "work around" just buy REnd>0 for your "basic" attack......