Abjurer

[AirborneRob]

Hey folks, im pretty new to the boards for HERO and im still trying to get comfortable with how HERO operates to building a character. I have a strong background with D&D and would like to write up an Abjurer for a friends Mage themed campaign he's doing later on down the road. I want to make sure that he is sticking mainly with defensive powers/abilities since that would be his focus and minimizing the amount of attack powers. I have some basics jotted down so far like Invisibility, Barrier (Defense & to Englobe), Reactive Counterspell that Narf gave me some suggestions for- made it Dispel with Trigger and left it a full blown NCC to reflect the fact that it's not a guarantee. Hope that looks right My big concern is how defensive Abjuration is, i dont want to send his potential DCV through the roof nor short change myself. Lol, any advice would be welcome. He is based on a standard 400 w/75 in complications.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Abjurer

 

Some spells vs. summons would probably be appropriate. Targeted Dispels, of course. Various Drains, such as OMCV/OCV and spells/powers. Maybe something to shatter weapons.

[Maccabe]

Re: Abjurer

 

I'm not sure about D&D 3.5 but in AD&D 2nd a specialist can have spells from other schools except those directly opposed. So if you feel like your character is TOO defensive and nothing else you might conisder other spells.

If you want to get really creative you might buy some spells as harder [RSR], you might consider buying a offenisve power, like flash defined as hallucinatory blindness ( an illusion).

I respect your wishing to stay true to charcater concept, but I'd want my players to have something more then just defenses

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: Abjurer

 

If you don't want to use other schools of magic, you can make a perfectly fine offensive abjurer.

 

I'd use Englobing Barriers as my magic circles (great to slow down an enemy, sometimes you can get a net action over them), I'd also use PRE with Extra Time (full phase) for things like dismissal, so I can send enemies running.

 

Add some defensive buffs for your friends (Resistance, Protection from X, etc). Now you've got some personal defenses, some defenses to share, and some interesting attacks. If you want to go high powered, nothing beats a complicated linked damage/transform/EDM UAA prismatic wall or sphere. Finally a Teleportation UAA (I have no idea what the balanced defense is), can function as your imprisonment.

 

You won't be throwing 12d6 blasts around, and you'll mostly be a crowd controller/support character, but you will be fairly interesting.

[AirborneRob]

Re: Abjurer

 

Narf, Maccabe and Roy, thank you all. I jotted down Barrier for both defense and to englobe an opponent because you're correct..... all defense is not a good idea by definition. Narf and i discussed Transforms as an option and i like the dismissal aspect used through PRE Roy. Im thinking about using Summon as Narf suggested to " create " a Golem bodyguard or something to that effect. Drains are a definate tool to have especially a Drain on SPD to minimize an opponents actions and therefore limit his/her offensive capabilities. Back to the Transform options, i was considering an AoE (perhaps Cone) Transform to affect weapons or Foci. I dont think that rates a Severe Transform, maybe a Major Transform since equipment is not as complex a pattern as a Humanoid form would be. Once again, thank you all for your input

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Abjurer

 

Vis a vis Abjuration as a "Counterspeller":

 

See what your GM's feeling is regarding the use of Dispel as a Defensive option for the purposes of Aborting. By the rules as written in 6e this officially requires a Held Action but conceptually falls under the "Use of any other Maneuver, activation / use of any other Power, or performing any other Action deemed by the GM to be primarily for purposes of defending or protecting the character" clause for aborting.

 

Personally, I allow a character to abort to a dispel vs. abilities that would harm them as it is in my opinion a defensive option. I do not allow a character to arbitrarily abort to dispel any effect, only those that would cause their character damage or harm.

 

This interpretation makes an "abjurer" type character that counters effects very playable, in a reactive type fashion, and increases the playability quite a bit. Otherwise, you will need to hold actions and / or rely on effects with Trigger to be viable as a counter-speller.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Abjurer

 

In general, for an abjurationist type of character, keep the following in mind:

 

Dispel generally works best if you don't have to add Advantages to it to get the effect you want as you need to keep the Active Points of the Dispel ability vs the Active Points it can dispel at an optimal ratio. It is often better to have several specialized Dispels with optimal d6 effect rather than one does-all Dispel. The exception to this is Dispels vs common SFX if the commonality of the SFX is sufficient to overcome the loss of effect.

 

Having said that, read and understand the Trigger Advantage. Triggered defenses or mitigation is very abjuration-y.

 

You can do some clever things with Deflection and Redirection.

 

Force Field, Force Wall / Barrier, and even in some case Entangle can be very useful for you.

 

Don't forget about Suppress; don't rely entirely on all-or-nothing effects.

 

You can wring a lot of interesting effects behind the concept of "Wards" and "Circles".

[AirborneRob]

Re: Abjurer

 

Im actually working towards a flexible option for doing the Counterspell though with my basic understanding of hero builds, lol, it may not be pretty at first blush. My first idea along those lines was with a Reactive Dispel/Counterspell as in a "Ring of Spell Turning" from D&D. At its current stage, I have it set up with a 14d6 Dispel with Trigger/ Activates when hostile magic is cast at wearer, Related Set of Conditions (Spells, Spell- like abilities) +1/4, Character does not control activation of personal trigger -1/4, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates +1/2. NCC -2 (So it's not a guaranteed at-will power for balance). Though im feeling that the Activation modifier is redundant with the NCC, not entirely sure. How does this Reactive Dispel look so far at first blush Killer Shrike, lol, or anyone else. HERO builds make my head hurt and the sick thing is that this is good hurt

[AirborneRob]

Re: Abjurer

 

Now, Deflection and Reflection are Block based abilities right? What i understand about block is you need a held action i think. I do want to make sure that this Abjurer can be Proactive as well as Reactive. The idea of using and redirecting an opponents own attack against them is a stellar idea. Definately very Abjuration-y

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Abjurer

 

You can abort to Block...in fact, aborting to a Block is a classic use of abort.

 

Deflection is a Defense Power, and is stated as simply being Ranged Block.

 

Reflection on the other hand is an Attack power, and explicitly does not work in conjunction with an Aborted Block.

[AirborneRob]

Re: Abjurer

 

Aborting generally uses up your next phase from what i understand, but i am considering a Trigger based Block with the option to either Deflect or Reflect. I was thinking of the old Vincent Price movie " The Raven" when they were dueling. The Abjurer can reactively create a " shield " effect to Block and redirect the incoming attack. Little off topic, if folks have not seen that movie and are or want to run/ play a mage, its a must see. I am not to held responsible for the special effects they used in the movie however

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Abjurer

 

Yes, a Trigger will let you use an action out of combat time and regain that action later. However, the cost involved w/ Trigger is obviously more than the cost involved without; this may or may not be a problem based on how many points you have available and so forth. Also, a Triggered ability must be used via its Trigger (unless the Trigger is a NPA or taken under the auspices of VarAdv (which is even more expensive)); this can create some awkwardness. Self Resetting Triggers avoid the awkwardness of Triggered abilities, but again this costs even more.

 

 

Don't get me wrong; I'm a big proponent of Triggers, particularly in conjunction with magic systems. However, there are overhead costs to consider.

[AirborneRob]

Re: Abjurer

 

Very true Killer Shrike. I am really trying to pay close attention to the cost/benefit ratio of abilities with a trigger. The reason i want to give the Abjurer a number of Triggered powers is to reflect the fact that an Abjurer can react defensively more effeciently than most others will be able to. At the same time, also making sure that it doesn't get too silly. Telekinesis is becoming my friend but not going to be a Trigger ability. The "Shield" ability i mentioned earlier in regards to Deflection i wrote up as a 20pt ability per the powers cost with +5 3pt CSL's only for Deflecting an incoming ranged spell or spell-like ability, with a Trigger. As to whether or not its the most effecient way to accomplish that effect i cant be sure. Looks good so far. Lol, i just keep plugging away. He's definately got several AID to characteristics, expanded effect (2 abilities), Constant, 4m AoE for group buffs. Fairly expensive, but managed some decent die potential for them of 5d6.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: Abjurer

 

At its current stage' date=' I have it set up with a 14d6 Dispel with Trigger/ Activates when hostile magic is cast at wearer, Related Set of Conditions (Spells, Spell- like abilities) +1/4, Character does not control activation of personal trigger -1/4, Trigger resets automatically, immediately after it activates +1/2. NCC -2 (So it's not a guaranteed at-will power for balance). Though im feeling that the Activation modifier is redundant with the NCC, not entirely sure. [/quote']

 

I agree that NCC + "Character does not controll Activation" is double dipping. Personally I wouldn't use the NCC because that means you can't control when it activates (and by that I mean when the trigger condition is met, the GM still has a say on if it activates), or how strong it activates. Both of those are a buzzkill for me on defenses.

 

And as far as the "character does not control activation of personal trigger" goes: When will it be a disadvantage to you that you cannot activate this trigger yourself? It seems to activate when you are targeted when you are attacked by hostile magic, which is exactly when you want it to trigger. Is there a time when you are the target of hostile magic, that you don't want it to trigger?

 

I'd be very weary on the NCC, for a -2 limitation it's gonna come up often, and if this is one of your signature abilities, you have no control over when it comes up (even more than it just being a triggered power, you have no control over which hostile spells trigger it).

[AirborneRob]

Re: Abjurer

 

Yea, it didn't seem right to me Roy. I hate redundancy, lol. I agree that i want it to be one of his Abjuration signature abilities but i get somewhat paranoid on balance issues. What would be a solution that most GM's would find acceptable? As an Abjurer, i feel justified in making him a challenge to affect but not impossibly so. I love the idea of a Reactive Dispel and want to make sure that people can look at te ability and say yes, thats acceptable.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: Abjurer

 

My thoughts are to perhaps take away NCC and "user does not control trigger activate" and go with "Requires an opposed attack roll" (-1/2). It's based on Requires a Skill Roll, 6E1 P389. That way you have to "block" the enemy attack with your own OCV to deflect it. You could also make it based on some other value (like an INT roll or something). That's my thought if I was the GM (and you wanted to put limitations on it). Your GM might have different wishes. I would also want Standard Effect Rule (+0) just to speed up game play.

 

Another way to build this power, would be as a continuous Dispel or a continuous suppress. Or just Damage Negation, only vs. spells (-1/2).

[AirborneRob]

Re: Abjurer

 

You know, i think the Requires a Roll for Reactive Dispel is a great idea. In the classical sense it would boil down to the skill of the mage to Dispel/Deflect an opposing caster's spell. I did write up Magic Resistance as a -6 DC Damage Negation and also wrote up Stoneskin for 25% Resistant Physical/Energy Damage Reduction. Because i do enjoy the aspect of spells not lasting indefinetly, i am considering Time Limit. I dont mind a spell that lasts for x amount of time plus y amount of time per level so to speak. In hero they give that option and instead of a per level bonus to duration it's based on how well you roll. If spell durations are a turn plus 1 turn for every x point or points you beat the required roll by, then i can adjust the overall limitation value. Or i could keep it to a 1 minute duration with no bonus duration based on roll as an option. Sorry for going a little off track with the Reactive Dispel, lol, im having way too much fun with putting my vision of the traditional mage together