Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

[lapsedgamer]

OK. To entertain myself, I'm designing a Fantasy Hero character who is an adventurer/alchemist, and a Champions character who is a super thief who steals magic items so that she can use them to steal other magic items.

 

So the alchemist has VPP, which is basically different spells with the special effect of "potions and mystical compounds." I write them up as powers with focus and charge limitations, but do they also have to be Independent?

 

I would instinctively say no. Sure, I can give my teammate a flask of explosive fluid that he/she can use just as well as I can, but do I have to make it Independent. I don't lose the points if the potion is destroyed, as I can make another one. I put a VPP can only be changed once a day, so I think he would have to wait another day or so to get the materials and make a new one and that would cover it. Is that an unfair handwave?

 

Now on the super-thief, it is a big cost savings to make all of the items Independent. The concept is that she has no innate powers except stats and a skill set similar to Catwoman's. She has a rotating selection of items she has access to. Some are stand-alone, and others are in a VPP. Independent makes more sense here, as she can actually lose an item if she isn't careful, and they are all by nature universal.

 

But the same thing is true of everything on a VIPER or UNTIL agents character sheet. Shouldn't all those items be Independent? Wouldn't that change a lot of the published write-ups? I don't see this tendency in Champions. Is Independent really just for heroic games?

[jtelson]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

When a VIPER agent loses his gear he can go back to the base (hopefully not followed by the heroes) and requisition more. The next time you meet that agent he's got his stuff back - that's a focus but not independent.

 

If the stand alone items are lost or destroyed and cannot be replaced shy of spending additional CP's then they are both Foci and Independent.

 

As a GM I'd be loathe to allow things in a VPP to have the Independent Limit. I'd be more inclined to go with an aquired items only limit on the pool. The character starts with a list of what's available (approved by the GM) If an item is lost it comes off the list if one is 'found' it goes on the list.

[mvoncannon]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

I use independent for only specific items that can be used as a plot device regardless of genre. If that is your intent, to give your GM plot devices, then by all means. Otherwise, since they are "universal" you could easily replace them, and remove that independent limitation.

[Markdoc]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

OK. To entertain myself, I'm designing a Fantasy Hero character who is an adventurer/alchemist, and a Champions character who is a super thief who steals magic items so that she can use them to steal other magic items.

 

So the alchemist has VPP, which is basically different spells with the special effect of "potions and mystical compounds." I write them up as powers with focus and charge limitations, but do they also have to be Independent?

 

I would instinctively say no. Sure, I can give my teammate a flask of explosive fluid that he/she can use just as well as I can, but do I have to make it Independent. I don't lose the points if the potion is destroyed, as I can make another one. I put a VPP can only be changed once a day, so I think he would have to wait another day or so to get the materials and make a new one and that would cover it. Is that an unfair handwave?

 

No, that's perfectly reasonable. It's how I do it myself. As you say when the potion is stolen or used, you don't lose the points. You can always make more.

 

Now on the super-thief, it is a big cost savings to make all of the items Independent. The concept is that she has no innate powers except stats and a skill set similar to Catwoman's. She has a rotating selection of items she has access to. Some are stand-alone, and others are in a VPP. Independent makes more sense here, as she can actually lose an item if she isn't careful, and they are all by nature universal.

 

But the same thing is true of everything on a VIPER or UNTIL agents character sheet. Shouldn't all those items be Independent? Wouldn't that change a lot of the published write-ups? I don't see this tendency in Champions. Is Independent really just for heroic games?

 

Again, no. The Viper agents don't get independent because if they get their blaster smashed up, they can just get another one. It might take them some time, it might be difficult (or it might not) but they can get another one. When the focus is temporarily gone, the agent can't use the powers, but the points are still there. If the nest is out of blasters, he might get a pulsar cannon instead, but whatever.

 

The same applies - as I read it - to your magical thief. You might use up/lose items from your VPP, but you don't lose the points: you can steal new magics to use those points. However, if you take Independant, and lose or use an item those points are gone. You can't steal a new item to "fill" that point allocation. For items outside the VPP, that might be appropriate (it's also where the savings are biggest). But you have to decide if you are OK with those items going away permanently. If not just describe it as an "unbreakable" focus: meaning the character can't make a new one, but if they lose it, can get the old one back at some point.

 

I do use independant in my games, but I use it rarely. Ironically, it is seeing quite a lot of use in the current game, where I use it to simulate the old celtic "geas" thing. Players can get magical powers with Independant as a limitation, but also have to take a geas (as a side effect). That makes powers cheap But if the player ever breaks the geas, he loses the power, which in game terms, means suffers a significant penalty since those points go away. It also means the players end up with nifty geases like "May never give or receive a gift" "May never mistreat an animal" "Always pass standing stones on the shadowed side", etc, which adds a nice flavour to that particular style of magic.

 

cheers, Mark

[Vulcan]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

OK. To entertain myself, I'm designing a Fantasy Hero character who is an adventurer/alchemist, and a Champions character who is a super thief who steals magic items so that she can use them to steal other magic items.

 

So the alchemist has VPP, which is basically different spells with the special effect of "potions and mystical compounds." I write them up as powers with focus and charge limitations, but do they also have to be Independent?

 

I would instinctively say no. Sure, I can give my teammate a flask of explosive fluid that he/she can use just as well as I can, but do I have to make it Independent. I don't lose the points if the potion is destroyed, as I can make another one. I put a VPP can only be changed once a day, so I think he would have to wait another day or so to get the materials and make a new one and that would cover it. Is that an unfair handwave?

 

Not in my opinion. This is a perfectly reasonable build, and so long as the limitations on the VPP powers are appropriate, then I think Independant is not needed. Univeral Focus should work just fine here.

 

Now on the super-thief, it is a big cost savings to make all of the items Independent. The concept is that she has no innate powers except stats and a skill set similar to Catwoman's. She has a rotating selection of items she has access to. Some are stand-alone, and others are in a VPP. Independent makes more sense here, as she can actually lose an item if she isn't careful, and they are all by nature universal.

 

This one is trickier. By concept, this sounds pretty reasonable, but a lot of concepts sound reasonable until I see the actual character build involved. It comes down to a varienty of factors:

 

• What percentage of the charater's points is going to be Independant? (A character with a lot of 'Independant' powers is going to be a lot tougher than one without 'Independant' powers - until the 'Independant' goes away, as it ineveitably will at some point.)
  
• Is there enough character left to be viable once the 'Independant' powers go away? (Or will the player just retire the character and start a new one, neutering the -2 limitation?)
  
• What are the character's relative 'Independant' and non-independant capabilities - and how do they complement each other? (Is the Independant stuff your full combat suite, leaving you lost of points for skills - but unable to fight your way out of a paper bag if they're lost, and that sort of thing.)
  

But the same thing is true of everything on a VIPER or UNTIL agents character sheet. Shouldn't all those items be Independent? Wouldn't that change a lot of the published write-ups? I don't see this tendency in Champions. Is Independent really just for heroic games?

 

VIPER and UNTIL agents belong to an organization that provides equipement for them. Likewise, a gun-toting superhero(ish) character likely has sources that can easily replenish his foci.

 

I suppose the best way to look at Independant is as a limitation on the points, not the item. If an item is Independant and you loose it, you loose the points. If the item is a focus and you loose it, you keep the points.

 

So if the 'magic cat burglar' has a VPP of magial gear, with a 'museum' where she can change her VPP powers, I would say the VPP is not independant. After all, in a world with magic items available to be stolen - and presumable occasionaly sold as well - there would be a place to buy the more common magic items. Other items that are less easily replaced as individual items could be replaced by other items with similar functions, though. So Independant may not be the way to go here. After all, if you put an Independant item into a VPP and loose it, you loose the points in the VPP as well!

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

I suppose the best way to look at Independant is as a limitation on the points' date=' not the [i']item[/i]. If an item is Independant and you loose it, you loose the points. If the item is a focus and you loose it, you keep the points.

 

This is precisely correct.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

Independent means that YOU can loose the pouint permanently. Just because someone else has an independent item does not mean you can gain the points (semi) permanently. To a large extent I cannot see anyone, ever, taking the indepndent limitation anything, but that is because I am not thinking like that character. The character is thinking: if I make and sell a dozen of these whozits then I'm set for LIFE!

 

I think the second character has a VPP that can only be changed by stealing something new (-1 or even -2, depending on the GM). I might - MIGHT - allow a sort of limited independent limitation on the powers in the pool, to simulate sometimes having powerful stuff and sometimes having less powerful stuff.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

I use it in Heroic games where characters pay points for gear (exceptional or otherwise).

[lapsedgamer]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

 

I suppose the best way to look at Independant is as a limitation on the points, not the item. If an item is Independant and you loose it, you loose the points. If the item is a focus and you loose it, you keep the points.

 

That makes a lot of sense to me. It is a much more succinct explanation than the one in 5ER. Repped.

[Vondy]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

As a general rule, I don't use it. Either the game defaults to all equipment being independent by the dint of being purchased for money at no point cost to the character, or it doesn't. I might consider a rare exception, but as a rule, characters who make magic items (or the like) in my games don't take independent because they can replace it by making another - albeit with time and effort. Instead, one of two things happens, depending on the game: 1) they use skill, time, effort, and whatever weird materials they needed to create another (the limitation being narrative time as opposed to points), or 2) they pay points for the item, but take OAF without Independent. I prefer #1, but I've done both.

[Doc Samson]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

Remember for a limitation to be a limitation, at some point it has to come into play otherwise its not worth any points. That means if you take Independent, you are guaranteeing that at some time in the future you will lose those points.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

The -2 you get allows you a lot of points for a little cost, but not little enough IMO. The trade off is that once you lose those points - and you can - they are gone.

 

Apart from an interesting way to model the effects of aging, or in a game where this is expected for all special items, I can't really see anyone going for it in a rpg, unless they think the GM is such a soft touch they will never do it to them.

[Utech]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

You might want to hand out experience as a mix of the following:

• Character Points
  
• Skills (especially Skill Levels) and/or Powers (especially Luck) built with Charges that Never Recover
  
• interesting items that are Independent (thus thought of as temporary)
  

[lapsedgamer]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

You might want to hand out experience as a mix of the following:

• Character Points
  
• Skills (especially Skill Levels) and/or Powers (especially Luck) built with Charges that Never Recover
  
• interesting items that are Independent (thus thought of as temporary)
  

 

The last two are very good ideas I haven't heard or really thought of before.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

I've used this as a GM to reward players when I've not wanted to hand out too much XP:

 

Got to succeed...2 real points (10 active)

 

+1 Overall (10 Active Points); 1 Charge which Never Recovers (-4)

 

But I'm not convinced that the limitations are big enough to convince players to spend on them. One use, ever, then it is gone....hmmm...

[GoldenAge]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

Remember for a limitation to be a limitation' date=' at some point it has to come into play otherwise its not worth any points. That means if you take Independent, you are guaranteeing that at some time in the future you will lose those points.[/quote']

 

Or end up on a quest to get those points back.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

I've used this as a GM to reward players when I've not wanted to hand out too much XP:

 

Got to succeed...2 real points (10 active)

 

+1 Overall (10 Active Points); 1 Charge which Never Recovers (-4)

 

But I'm not convinced that the limitations are big enough to convince players to spend on them. One use, ever, then it is gone....hmmm...

 

not unlike Favors which are essentially:

1 pt Contact 14- (5AP) 1 Charge Which Never Recovers (-4)

 

which I tend to hand out like Hallowe'en treats in some campaigns

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

Remember for a limitation to be a limitation' date=' at some point it has to come into play otherwise its not worth any points. That means if you take Independent, you are guaranteeing that at some time in the future you will lose those points.[/quote']

 

"guaranteeing that at some time in the future you will lose those points" is not true at all.

 

The Limitation takes immediate effect when it is applied by forever divesting the character of some number of points. By virtue of this having been done it also becomes possible for the character to in future have that item permanently removed from them, but it does not in anyway guarantee or mandate that it happen. It CAN happen, not it MUST happen or WILL happen.

 

The bottom line is all Independent does is subtract points from a character and sequester them into an item as a separate entity. Thus, the power construct is INDEPENDENT of the character. The possessor of the thing which is Independent gains the utility of the construct while they possess it, but the points embedded in it don't actually belong to them.

 

An Independent item may or may not leave the possession of the original bearer whom the points were extracted from, and it may leave possession and be returned many times. If the character is canny enough to keep the item against any attempts to remove it from their possession then they are never deprived of its use. If the character does lose the item, they can always attempt to get it back and if they do then they regain it's use exactly as if it had never left their possession.

[Vulcan]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

True enough.

 

But unless a GM at least tries to take the Independant item away from the charcter pretty regularly, it becomse a cheap way to get three times as much power.

 

The reason not to take Independant is the threat of the loss. If the GM doesn't follow through on the threat, then it's the rest of the players who loose, because their characters fall behind the power curve of the character who did take Independant.

[Vondy]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

True enough.

 

But unless a GM at least tries to take the Independant item away from the charcter pretty regularly, it becomse a cheap way to get three times as much power.

 

The reason not to take Independant is the threat of the loss. If the GM doesn't follow through on the threat, then it's the rest of the players who loose, because their characters fall behind the power curve of the character who did take Independant.

 

I disagree that life, or gaming, has to be perfectly fair and balanced.

 

We make choices. We know what the potential benefits and risks are. We live with them.

 

Character design is like life. You make choices and live with the benefits and risks. What will be will be.

 

The limitation gives the GM the option of using the independent nature of the item as a story point.

 

It does not obligate the GM to take punitive action.

 

And GMs who routinely step on limitations on principle as opposed to doing so in the course of good storytelling tend to be justly regarded as a host of bad things.

 

If it works as a plot point, all good. If it doesn't, it doesn't.

[Utech]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

I'd say a player who takes the Independent Limitation on a Power is saying to their GM: "I want the potential loss of this to be something that challenges my character."

 

The GM is in no way obligated to ensure the thing is lost. The GM should, however, work with the player to figure out what sort of challenges the player is interested in dealing with.

 

If the player doesn't want to be limited by the Independent Limitation then it is, of course, not worth any points. If the player wants to be only mildly limited by the Independent Limitation, the GM should lower the value of the Independent Limitation.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

The problem is that Independent only actually impacts the character (and thus limits the powers) if the abilities are taken away at some point. The character has extra power while the item sticks around and reduced power if it does not.

 

KS' comments make me think of using Independent as a more limited focus. It will be harder to replace, so I'll take it away for longer periods. Now, that is more limiting, and while a different interpretation, enforces that you got an extra -2 limitation, and should have less access to the powers as a consequence. I like that approach.

 

Still, the Independent limitation says "sometimes I will have considerably more power than my peers, and other times I will have less". The 'standard' model says I get more power until I lose it, then I have less power. The KS model says I get more power when I have it, but I frequently will not have those points. The latter avoids the "lost my item; retire this character and start a new one" tendency.

[Markdoc]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

Still' date=' the Independent limitation says "sometimes I will have considerably more power than my peers, and other times I will have less". The 'standard' model says I get more power until I lose it, then I have less power. The KS model says I get more power when I have it, but I frequently will not have those points. The latter avoids the "lost my item; retire this character and start a new one" tendency.[/quote']

 

Whenever a player wants to take that limitation, I point out in advance that they can - and at some point, probably will - lose that chunk of points and may, or may not regain it - ever. If they do regain it we're looking at a very long absence. Given that option, most players turn it down. That said, I have had Independant items in the game in the hands of PCs, and it has worked OK. There's the current game where players have magical gifts that they lose if they break their geasa. These are mostly small point items. One player has lost his gift (his geas was "Never receive or give a gift" and he thoughtlessly gave a starving man some coins. So 3 character points went "Poof!"

 

The other was a PC who carried around his grandfather's skull, which contained said relative's spirit. I never did actually take that away since grandfather was too much fun: I used the "independant" there as licence to torment the player with the spirit's threat to disappear, and Grandfather was, at any rate a cantankerous old sod, often refusing to help, unless outrageously flattered, commenting acidly on the abilities and decisions of modern adventurers compared to those of his day, when men were real men, and women were ... grrr ... real women and zombies were real zombies, etc etc. In that case I felt like I had gotten my money's worth out of the Disad. And judging by the players' reactions, they did too.

 

cheers, Mark

[Korvar]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

In a Heroic campaign, where characters can lose Stuff at the GM's whim (and buy it back when they get the cash), I'd be tempted to occasionally dump a few character points and an Independent limitation on the party Mage for them to make a magic item from, in the same way I might drop a magic sword for the Fighter.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Does anyone use the Independent Limitation?

 

True enough.

 

But unless a GM at least tries to take the Independant item away from the charcter pretty regularly, it becomse a cheap way to get three times as much power.

 

The reason not to take Independant is the threat of the loss. If the GM doesn't follow through on the threat, then it's the rest of the players who loose, because their characters fall behind the power curve of the character who did take Independant.

 

This is only true if a person taking IND for something like say a Magic Item were _unusual_ to the campaign.

 

 

If on the other hand it is the campaign standard way to design such anyone can take and use them effects then its not an abuse of the system its a use of the system.

 

You are assuming that all Limitations are equally valid and used exactly the same way. Some modifiers are general purpose and some are there to provide a way for a particular thing to be modeled without having to make it up yourself.

 

For instance, OIHID is very specialized and used to model a concept common to a particular sort of game and generally not otherwise. It also has some built in assumptions like a character using it also has a particular Disadvantage (Secret ID).

 

Similarly Delayed Effect is very specialized and has some assumptions about how a particular concept that uses it is orchestrated.

 

NCC is very specialized and has some assumptions around what is and isn't possible and on how strict the GM will be.

 

And so on and so forth. Many modifiers are not universally appropriate and intended to be valid for any particular power construct for any particular campaign in any particular genre. They exist to allow something to be modeled _if it and the assumptions attached to it make sense in the context of the campaign_.

 

 

Independent is really not something Joe Blow Character should be taking in a vacuum as a short sighted way to cut points. Its a Limitation that the GM should decide to engage as a way to model the concept of effects that are portable, as something that is even possible in the context of their campaign, and then mandating its use in such cases as part of a broader vision / effort.