Not Taking Advantage

[Kdansky]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

VA is just too expensive for that it does (I think). I'd rather buy a MP with half a dozen slots. About the same cost, but can be customized and does not destroy my AP limit.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

VA is just too expensive for that it does (I think). I'd rather buy a MP with half a dozen slots. About the same cost' date=' but can be customized and does not destroy my AP limit.[/quote']

 

see this old thread:

Re: Something I just noticed and dislike about multipowers

[Wayside]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Well, in my opinion they are already defined enough, though the general naked advantage one is a bit vague on how many things it adds to (probably intentionally).

 

Also there is usually a big difference in cost between a group naked advantage and a single power naked advantage since the naked advantage for the single power is based on the cost of that power's real points rather than it's active points.

 

30 Armor Piercing (+1/2 any firearm built on 60pts or less)

10 Armor Piercing (+1/2 only with My Rifle) 4d6 killing[60 active points, 20 real points] -the same cost as applying the advantage directly to the weapon

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

AFAICT, these two constructs cost the same, by the rules:

 

a) 10d6 EB Explosion - 75 Points, the Explosion always happens, you can't turn it off.

 

and

 

10d6 EB, plain - 50 Points

NPA Explosion for 10d6 EB - 25 Points

Total cost = 75, now, for the same price, you can turn the explosion on or off at will, and you don't have to pay END for it when you aren't using it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

AFAICT, these two constructs cost the same, by the rules:

 

a) 10d6 EB Explosion - 75 Points, the Explosion always happens, you can't turn it off.

 

and

 

10d6 EB, plain - 50 Points

NPA Explosion for 10d6 EB - 25 Points

Total cost = 75, now, for the same price, you can turn the explosion on or off at will, and you don't have to pay END for it when you aren't using it.

 

That's what concerns me - no system differentiation between the points, and the second build seems far more useful to me.

 

Perhaps NPAs should have to take an advantage:

 

+1/4 - applies to a single power

+1/2 - applies to 2 powers (or a tight sfx)

+1 - applies to up to 4 powers (or a broad sfx)

+2 - applies to any power

 

You still get the utility of having a NPA in the system, but it is more cost balanced with the straight advantaged power.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

That's what concerns me - no system differentiation between the points, and the second build seems far more useful to me.

 

Perhaps NPAs should have to take an advantage:

 

+1/4 - applies to a single power

+1/2 - applies to 2 powers (or a tight sfx)

+1 - applies to up to 4 powers (or a broad sfx)

+2 - applies to any power

 

You still get the utility of having a NPA in the system, but it is more cost balanced with the straight advantaged power.

 

That would only be necessary if the base power the NPA applies to is not part of a framework. As long as it is part of one, like a Multipower for example, the NPA can't be also be built inside the framework. It is always going to cost significantly more than the base power & same Advantage built without the 'naked label' inside of a framework.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

That would only be necessary if the base power the NPA applies to is not part of a framework. As long as it is part of one' date=' like a Multipower for example, the NPA can't be also be built inside the framework. It is always going to cost significantly more than the base power & same Advantage built without the 'naked label' inside of a framework.[/quote']

 

 

I'm not sure:

 

MP 40 point pool

 

u1 4 points

u2 4 points

u3 4 points

u4 4 points

 

Total 56 points

 

PLUS NPA (+1/2) 20 points

 

Total 76 points

 

As against (and assuming the NPA only applies to slot 1)

 

MP 60 points

 

u1 6 points

u2 4 points

u3 4 points

u4 4 points

 

Total 78 points; if the NPA applied to all slots the cost differential would go up to 96 points.

 

ECs are less likely to be themed, but

 

EC 20 point pool

 

Slot 1 20 points

Slot 2 20 points

Slot 3 20 points

 

NPA applies to slot 1 only 20 points

 

Total: 100 points: exactly the same as if slot 1 had been bought with the advantage straight:

 

EC 20 point pool

Slot 1 40 points

Slot 2 20 points

Slot 3 20 points

 

If the NPA applied to more than one EC slot you'd be saving points.

 

There should be some cost differentiation because you are still getting more utility, even with frameworks. In fact especially with frameworks.

[Wayside]

Actually, NPA's can't be applied to powers inside a framework at all (unless the gm permits it), so that point is moot. Though I do see your concerns about the cost. While it does add more utility to the power than having bought the power straight with the advantage applied to it, I don't think it's advantageous enough to warrant a greater cost.

 

If you have a 90 active point power that's only a 12d6 energy blast explosion, it's not that much of an advantage to be able to fire it as a 60 active point 12d6 energy blast. If the character could fire it as a 90 active point 18d6 energy blast it would definetely be an issue.

 

But, since explosion and area of effect are essentially the only advantages that doing it without the advantage is really helpful in a given situation (perhaps if you had an NND or AVLD and you needed to switch it to a normal blast to hurt them at all, thought it's probably going to be so weak that it won't matter) I don't think it's worth any advantage to be able to do so.

 

EDIT: Of course you could always house rule a +1/4 additional advantage onto any area of affect or explosion taken as a naked power advantage (similarly to how autofire recieves an additional +1 in combination with certain other things)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Actually, NPA's can't be applied to powers inside a framework at all (unless the gm permits it), so that point is moot. Though I do see your concerns about the cost. While it does add more utility to the power than having bought the power straight with the advantage applied to it, I don't think it's advantageous enough to warrant a greater cost.

 

If you have a 90 active point power that's only a 12d6 energy blast explosion, it's not that much of an advantage to be able to fire it as a 60 active point 12d6 energy blast. If the character could fire it as a 90 active point 18d6 energy blast it would definetely be an issue.

 

But, since explosion and area of effect are essentially the only advantages that doing it without the advantage is really helpful in a given situation (perhaps if you had an NND or AVLD and you needed to switch it to a normal blast to hurt them at all, thought it's probably going to be so weak that it won't matter) I don't think it's worth any advantage to be able to do so.

 

EDIT: Of course you could always house rule a +1/4 additional advantage onto any area of affect or explosion taken as a naked power advantage (similarly to how autofire recieves an additional +1 in combination with certain other things)

 

True, but...compare these:

 

12d6 EB Armour piercing against rigid or brittle targets (vibrational blast)

 

12d6 EB: 60 points

+1/2 advantage (AP): 30 points

Only v rigid or brittle targets -1 on advantage (30/2)=15

 

total cost = 75 points

 

OR

 

12d6 EB: 60 points

 

Plus NPA: AP (only v rigid or brittle targets) vibrational blast

+1/2 advantage on 60 points = 30 points at -1 limitation: 15 points

 

Total cost 75 points.

 

Same cost. Cool.

 

Point is that you don't have to use the NPA, so if you know the target it not brittle or rigid, you can save yourself an extra 3 END per use. That mounts up quickly.

 

Sure that may not be the most common of builds but it certainly isn't only AOE that need reigning in now and then.

 

Also, compare using damage shield as an NPA - where advantages bring limitations with them, NPA milks additional utility.

[CTaylor]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

I think this is too narrow a focus, really. Yes, there could be an advantage to let you use advantages or not as you choose (+1/4 would cover it) but it could do other things as well. I call this "Variable Effect" and list these example:

 

* Changing the PD or ED level of a defense power such as Force Field without changing the other defense

* Using a power with an advantage, such as Area Effect, with or without the advantage

* Varying the size of an Area Effect such as Radius or Ring to smaller than its full area covered

* Making the attack normal or stun only

* Varying the DEF and BOD of an Entangle attack

* Limiting the senses affected by a Darkness or Images power

 

Just NTA is too restrictive, this would broaden the advantage and make it more useful and broader in effect.

[Wayside]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Well, in my opinion the advantages to using the npa in such a manner (turning it off when it's not useful to save end) is a very narrow and uncommon advantage. I think that it is narrow and uncommon enough that it's equally narrow and uncommon disadvantage (easier to drain, supress, etc...) balances it out.

 

Yes defining your advantage as an NPA grants some minor utility to the power, but it also gives it a minor disadvantage. In some cases the advantage might outweigh the disadvantage a bit (ie explosion) but It doesn't seem like enough to warrant extra cost. Perhaps depending on how often drains are used in the campaign.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

Just out of curiosity, I compiled below a list of Advantages that it would be useful to be able to turn off at will (other than the desirability of saving END/Charges, which would apply to any Advantage):

 

1. Area Effect
   
2. BOECV (Who knows? You might want to go against DCV and regular defenses under some circumstance.)
   
3. Damage Shield
   
4. Explosion
   
5. Hole in the Middle, Fixed (if it's Variable, you can always shrink it down to nothing)
   
6. Invisible (maybe there might be a circumstance where you really *want* the power to be visible)
   
7. Lingering
   
8. MegaScale
   
9. Sticky (Most of the time, this won't be a problem, especially if the power is visible, but occasionally a non-intended target could be affected by touching the target accidentally.)
   
10. Usable As Attack
    
11. AVLD/NND (you might want to be able to do BODY)
    
12. Does BODY (you might want to not do BODY)
    
13. Does Knockback/Double Knockback (you might want to do less/no KB)
    
14. Stretching Does Not Cross Intervening Space (you might want to use your body as a long barrier)
    

 

That's all of them that I could find. All the others can either be "ignored," like Affects Desolid (you don't *have* to fire it only at Desolid targets), or can be used or not at will, like Autofire (just fire one shot) or Ranged (there's nothing stopping you from using it point-blank), or don't hinder you in any way by having it there, like Personal Immunity or Difficult to Dispel.

[Wayside]

Re: Not Taking Advantage

 

It seems to me if you wanted to do those things you would just buy them in a multipower. Is it really advantageous to fire your AVLD or NND at someone without that advantage? Considering it is half as powerful as a normal power in the campaign, it probably won't be able to injure the opponent. In a campaign of 10d6 energy blasts, what good is a 5d6 energy blast going to do? You spend some extra points and you get actual useful powers that do what you're looking for. Do you really think your half effectiveness attack can do any damage at all? I have my doubts.

 

You make some good points with several of those, but with most of them I still have to disagree. The amount of dice you are losing to have an advantage in the situation the advantage is for make them lose a lot of their function when they lose that advantage. You're better off using one of your other powers entirely.