"takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

[secretID]

I've just been hashing through one such power with a player, and every time I bump into this it bugs me. At first I thought it was a BOECV issue, but really I think it's the "takes no damage."

 

Consider:

Paralysis Dust Gun: Entangle 2d6, 4 DEF, Takes No Damage From Attacks

(+1/2), Area of Effect (10" cone; +1); OAF (air gun with powder

cartridge; -1), 16 clips of 3 charges (recovers under limited

circumstances; -1/2), No Range (-1/2), Cannot Form Barriers (-1/4) Real

Cost: 23

 

Unless I misunderstand, the targets will be caught in an entangle with 4 DEF and an average 2 BOD. No one else can help free them. The targets must be able to 5 BOD to have a chance at breaking free, and if I consider sfx, it makes no sense that they could use HA or accessible foci (see two recent related threads).

 

So...targets with STR < 18 are basically done, barring pretty good luck, especially considering that they're sitting ducks while entangled. A target with up to 55 STR is still done, if his SPD is lower than the shooter's, since the target will need every full phase to break out of each renewed entangle, at least until the charges run out.

 

If I have all that right (and please tell me if I don't), that's enormously powerful at that price. A fight-ender that can't miss, with no defense, for 23 points. The AoE is one issue, but I don't think it's the biggest.

 

Compare it to similar effects, say limited mind control ("Don't move") or suppress SPD. I haven't built them, but I think it would be very expensive to make a similarly powerful effect those ways, and those builds would have important limitations, including defenses (always nice to have) and time/END limitations.

 

I think it's those two things combined: 1) entangle is an instant, so there's no time/END lim; and 2) entangle has no defense, so the only "defense" is to break it. When you take away #2 in large part, you've essentially made it a NND entangle.

 

I'm thinking that should be at least +1, if I allow it at all, but I'm hoping those with more experience might have some thoughts.

[Mr. Gridlock]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

It's 75 Active Points. That's equal to a 15d6 EB!

 

I'm not sure I would allow the AoE of Cone for a "dart" gun. Perhaps AoE One Hex (Accurate). That makes better sense to me.

 

Also remember it's an OAF. All someone has to see is the dart gun work once to know that this guy needs to be targeted (him or the OAF itself). Also remember that after the 3rd shot, he'll have to spend some time to swap clips.

 

I would disallow the "recovers under limited circumstances" since the charges weren't bought with the Recoverable advantage. It's only a 4-point difference if it were though, but as it stands it's not a legal build without it IMO.

 

It's not really an NND at all since a character with sufficient STR can break out, even with Casual STR (which he gets the instant he's attacked).

[Sean Waters]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Well you do have -2 1/4 in limitations there - better to compare the active cost as you could stick most of those limitations on any offensive power.

 

As to the advantage, well IIRC, NORMALLY the entangle takes no damage but it can be specifically targeted at -3 OCV (and an entangle is 0 DCV, so that is pretty easy), so others can help the breakout.

[Sean Waters]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Also, IMO, despite the fact that the book recommends entangle for 'paralysis' sfx, entangle does not work well for a 'paralysis dust' as it makes little sense that you could cut your way out of it or even 'power your way out'.

 

Better to make it BOECV and then Based on CON - but that is an unfortunately inefficient build, if you do worry about active point caps.

 

Of course for 75 active points you can manage a 15d6 SPD suppress, which is not far off paralysis for a lot of targets

[Hyper-Man]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

A better mechanic for a Paralysis SFX is Mind Control - Based on CON.

Easier to get around Active Point cap issues too.

 

example:

24 Paralysis Dust: Mind Control 8d6, 128 clips of 1 Charge (+0), Cumulative (+1/2) (60 Active Points); Based on CON (Defense: ED; -1), Set Effect (Stand Still; -1/2)

[Mr. Gridlock]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

A better mechanic for a Paralysis SFX is Mind Control - Based on CON.

Easier to get around Active Point cap issues too.

 

example:

24 Paralysis Dust: Mind Control 8d6, 128 clips of 1 Charge (+0), Cumulative (+1/2) (60 Active Points); Based on CON (Defense: ED; -1), Set Effect (Stand Still; -1/2)

 

 

Don't you need Continuous to make this work? Otherwise the attacker has to keep using another charge and then he's just as paralyzed as the victim.

 

And then I'm not sure about clips with this because where's the penalty for changing clips?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Don't you need Continuous to make this work? Otherwise the attacker has to keep using another charge and then he's just as paralyzed as the victim.

 

And then I'm not sure about clips with this because where's the penalty for changing clips?

 

from 5er page 120

 

LIMITATIONS

Based On CON (-1): You can use the HERO System’s Mental Powers to create some drugs or other physical effects. To simulate this, characters can buy a Mental Power to affect targets through their CON instead of their EGO. A Power with this Limitation becomes a normal attack with a range of 5” x Active Points, is targeted with CV instead of ECV (unless the GM allows the character to choose otherwise), is perceivable by three Sense Groups, is subject to the Range Modifier, and requires an Attack Roll to hit its target. The target’s Energy Defense or Physical Defense, not Mental Defense, applies against the attack (the character defines which Characteristic applies when he buys the power, and cannot change it thereafter). Compare the Effect Roll to the target’s CON (substitute CON for EGO on the Effects Table of the Mental Power). A Mental Power Based On CON lasts until the target shrugs off its effects, which requires a successful CON-based Breakout Roll made with the standard modifiers (if applicable).

 

from 5er page 285

 

It takes a Full Phase for a character to change Clips (unless he succeeds with a Fast Draw roll, see page 59). If a character wants reloading to take longer than that, he can increase the value of the Charges Limitation as indicated in the Increased Reloading Time table.

[Sean Waters]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Cumulative doesn't require constant application IIRC. I don't think there are any actual rules as to how quickly points 'fade' if you do not apply every phase, but I'd suggest pretty quickly, perhaps 10 points per turn or more, PS12, or, maybe, all points fade PS12 if you have not reached the required effect level, unless there has been at least one application of the power that turn.

 

Thinking on it that second route sounds better to me.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

re: Cumulative

 

(Hero System Fifth Edition Rule Book, page 163; Revised, page 253)

 

This Advantage allows the character to add successive effect rolls to one another, so that he can use a small amount of dice in a Power again and again, slowly building up to the point where he achieves enough power to have a real effect on the target.

[secretID]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

As to the advantage' date=' well IIRC, NORMALLY the entangle takes no damage but it can be specifically targeted at -3 OCV (and an entangle is 0 DCV, so that is pretty easy), so others can help the breakout.[/quote']

? Really? You mean you can target a "takes no damage" entangle at -3 OCV? I'll have to look that up later. That's very weird - what does that look like? What does it look like for mental paralysis?

 

Are you sure you're not talking about attacks designed to target the entangle w/o hitting the entangled character?

[secretID]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Also' date=' IMO, despite the fact that the book recommends entangle for 'paralysis' sfx, entangle does not work well for a 'paralysis dust' as it makes little sense that you could cut your way out of it or even 'power your way out'.[/quote']

Um...I think you missed the "takes no damage" advantage on the entangle, which is the aspect I'm addressing.

 

Better to make it BOECV and then Based on CON - but that is an unfortunately inefficient build' date=' if you do worry about active point caps.[/quote']

He started with it as BOECV, but that didn't make any sense to me. Think about it - w/o the AoE, the target would avoid the dust based on his EGO, not DEX. The based on CON is interesting...

 

Of course for 75 active points you can manage a 15d6 SPD suppress' date=' which is not far off paralysis for a lot of targets [/quote']

I don't think that's the fair comparison, b/c half of those 75 points are in the AoE. This is way more powerful than, say, a 7.5d6 AoE cone suppress, which: 1) would only take off, say, 2.5 SPD points; and 2) would cost END, and stop once the shooter was knocked out.

[secretID]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

A better mechanic for a Paralysis SFX is Mind Control - Based on CON.

Easier to get around Active Point cap issues too.

 

example:

24 Paralysis Dust: Mind Control 8d6, 128 clips of 1 Charge (+0), Cumulative (+1/2) (60 Active Points); Based on CON (Defense: ED; -1), Set Effect (Stand Still; -1/2)

That's REALLY interesting. It's not really clicking for me, though. Could you walk me through it, from the start of the attack? Is it as follows:

- MC attack, OECV vs. DECV

- effect equal to 8d6 - ED

- if that's sufficient for "stand still," then breakout roll vs. CON

- repeat

 

If that's right, a few questions: 1) Could he count PD instead of ED, which makes more sense to me? 2) When determining whether the attack was strong enough to cause the effect, would we compare it to the target's EGO or to his CON?

 

Thanks for any help. I can look this up when I get home, but you've got me really curious.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

? Really? You mean you can target a "takes no damage" entangle at -3 OCV? I'll have to look that up later. That's very weird - what does that look like? What does it look like for mental paralysis?

 

Are you sure you're not talking about attacks designed to target the entangle w/o hitting the entangled character?

 

A perfect example is a net made out of rope. Once a target is in the net basic normal attacks vs. the target don't hurt the net at all.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

That's REALLY interesting. It's not really clicking for me, though. Could you walk me through it, from the start of the attack? Is it as follows:

- MC attack, OECV vs. DECV

- effect equal to 8d6 - ED

- if that's sufficient for "stand still," then breakout roll vs. CON

- repeat

 

If that's right, a few questions: 1) Could he count PD instead of ED, which makes more sense to me? 2) When determining whether the attack was strong enough to cause the effect, would we compare it to the target's EGO or to his CON?

 

Thanks for any help. I can look this up when I get home, but you've got me really curious.

 

Based on CON changes it from OECV vs. DECV to normal OCV vs. DCV. Whether it's vs. PD or ED is just a 1 time choice made when the power is created. The effect roll is vs. the targets CON instead of their EGO (hence the name of the Limitation).

[secretID]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Based on CON changes it from OECV vs. DECV to normal OCV vs. DCV. Whether it's vs. PD or ED is just a 1 time choice made when the power is created. The effect roll is vs. the targets CON instead of their EGO (hence the name of the Limitation).

Cool - that sounds perfect. Thanks for the help.

[Vulcan]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

The other thing to bear in mind about all this is that most GM's will be quick to disallow the whole kit 'n' kaboodle as soon as they figure out how unbalancing it is. You may actually get one use out of it, but don't count on the GM letting you use it a second time.

 

There are many ways to make unbalanced, unfair, or just plain wrongpower builds. The GM is the final line of defense against them.

[secretID]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

The other thing to bear in mind about all this is that most GM's will be quick to disallow the whole kit 'n' kaboodle as soon as they figure out how unbalancing it is. You may actually get one use out of it, but don't count on the GM letting you use it a second time.

 

There are many ways to make unbalanced, unfair, or just plain wrongpower builds. The GM is the final line of defense against them.

 

Sure, but I think the advantage is underpriced across the board. For a low price - 45 AP - you can get an attack that can take the majority of normal superheroic characters out of the fight: a 2d6/4 DEF entangle with takes no damage.. I.e., it will more or less permanently entangle those under 25 or so STR, barring desol and similar.

 

Absolutely no defense applies. The effect is permanent, with no time, LOS, or END limitation. Friends can't help the target.

 

I'm sure there are complicated, possibly abusive builds that are similarly overpowered, but this isn't some manipulation of the rules - it's a simple use of one advantage.

[Vulcan]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

What do you mean, friends can't help the target? I think you misunderstand the nature of the 'takes no damage from attack' advantage.

 

Quoting 5E, p.109.

Takes No Damage From Attacks (+1/4, +1/2):

An Entangle with this advantage is transparent to attacks - attackers can damage the Entangled character normally without damaging the Entangle itself. If an attacker targets the Entangle specifically (at a -3 OCV), the damage affects the Entagle and then the Entangled character, as with a normal Entangle.

 

 

What 'takes no damage from attacks' means is that you can attack the Entagled target without damaging the entagle, not that no one outside the Entagle can damage it, period.

 

It is used to simulate methods of restraining a character that do not provide protection to the target - such as handcuffs, or a lariat.

 

A paralysis-drugged dart should be built as 'BOECV' and 'Mental Power based on CON.' 'Takes no damage' probably should not enter into it.

[Sean Waters]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Um...I think you missed the "takes no damage" advantage on the entangle' date=' which is the aspect I'm addressing.[/quote']

 

Um...no, I don't think I did. If an entangle took no damage from attacks then no one could ever get out of it. That advantage simply means that people can attack the entangled character without damaging the entangle, but the entangled person can always damage the entangle (hence they could cut themselves out of paralysis...) and an 'external' attacker can specifically attack the entangle by taking a -3 OCV. That may be why you think the advantage is such a huge one - but it isn't.

[Sean Waters]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

re: Cumulative

 

 

Indeed, but what it does not say is how long the points you accumulate last. Can you apply mind control once a day and have the effects accumulate or do the points fade in the meantime?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Indeed' date=' but what it does not say is how long the points you accumulate last. [/quote']

 

Yes it does.

 

from 5er page 253,

 

Each time a Cumulative power is used against the same target within a discrete time frame (typically, one combat or one game “scene,” but possibly as long as one adventure or one day, if the GM so permits), the amount rolled on the effect roll is added to the total effect roll already rolled. The appropriate defense, if any, applies to each separate roll. If necessary, the character must declare the effect he wishes to achieve when he first rolls the dice. The character must make an Attack Roll each time he uses the power (even if it’s a Constant Power), unless he buys the Continuous Advantage for the power.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

I've just been hashing through one such power with a player, and every time I bump into this it bugs me. At first I thought it was a BOECV issue, but really I think it's the "takes no damage."

 

Consider:

Paralysis Dust Gun: Entangle 2d6, 4 DEF, Takes No Damage From Attacks

(+1/2), Area of Effect (10" cone; +1); OAF (air gun with powder

cartridge; -1), 16 clips of 3 charges (recovers under limited

circumstances; -1/2), No Range (-1/2), Cannot Form Barriers (-1/4) Real

Cost: 23

 

Unless I misunderstand, the targets will be caught in an entangle with 4 DEF and an average 2 BOD. No one else can help free them. The targets must be able to 5 BOD to have a chance at breaking free, and if I consider sfx, it makes no sense that they could use HA or accessible foci (see two recent related threads).

 

You misunderstand. "Entangle Takes no Damage" is one step up from "Entangle and Target Both Take Damage". A shot against the target does not automatically hurt the Entangle as well.

 

The Entangle can be targeted separately, so a teammate can help.

 

So...targets with STR < 18 are basically done' date=' barring pretty good luck, especially considering that they're sitting ducks while entangled. A target with up to 55 STR is still done, if his SPD is lower than the shooter's, since the target will need every full phase to break out of each renewed entangle, at least until the charges run out.[/quote']

 

If you can have a 75 AP attack, presumably the target can too. 15d6 of pretty much anything will punch right through that Entangle. And I wouldn't disallow Hand Attack - Hand Attacks do damage. As for the OAF, well, that's why you saved half the points. And I wouldn't let you fire your dust while Entangled either.

 

If I have all that right (and please tell me if I don't)' date=' that's enormously powerful at that price. A fight-ender that can't miss, with no defense, for 23 points. The AoE is one issue, but I don't think it's the biggest.[/quote']

 

It can miss. Dive for Cover. Note that you have to hit everyone in the cone, so I can move around to force you to target your teammates.

 

Compare it to similar effects' date=' say limited mind control ("Don't move") or suppress SPD. I haven't built them, but I think it would be very expensive to make a similarly powerful effect those ways, and those builds would have important limitations, including defenses (always nice to have) and time/END limitations.[/quote']

 

15d6 Mind Control, average roll 52.5 will have a significant impact. 15d6 Speed Suppress will drop your SPD by 5 - that's a fight ender for a lot of targets, and another 15d6 is the end of the matter.

 

BTW, if I keep breaking out, you only get three phases, best case. In the fourth, you have to change the clip, and that's when I grab you or your gun. It's No Range, so you're standing right there. In fact, my teammate just has to knock you back. Now you need 1/2 phase to get up and 1/2 phase to get back into HTH range.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Actually, if anything is wrongly priced, it's that +1d6 BOD and +1 DEF are equal. Extra DEF is considerably more useful.

[secretID]

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

 

Actually' date=' if anything is wrongly priced, it's that +1d6 BOD and +1 DEF are equal. Extra DEF is considerably more useful.[/quote']

Yeah, for me the extra DEF is a no-brainer.

 

Re the several recent responses: I was obviously way off; thanks for the correction. That also makes it clear that Hyper-Man's build is a much better fit. By these sfx, I don't see how the entangle could be targeted. The mind control also works better with the OAF, b/c the OAF lim could apply to the blow gun itself, and then to the dust, which teammates could brush away.

 

Thanks again.