VPP active point costs

[dmjalund]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

can't you buy +nd6 only to add to VPP slot, when VPP slot uses plain Blast?

[Kraven Kor]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

can't you buy +nd6 only to add to VPP slot' date=' when VPP slot uses plain Blast?[/quote']

 

Legal, but Warning: Aiding a VPP Slot can easily make for a character with both unlimited (or nearly unlimited) options, while also having each of those options break campaign AP limits or at least the AP of other members.

 

Usually, a VPP is expensive enough that you aren't going to be throwing around as many dice of effect as the guy who is "Just a Blaster." So the 20d6 Blaster guy has a bigger attack than you, but less versatility. Aiding the VPP slot, while legal, can result in someone who is both versatile, and "max power" as well. Might not necessarily be a bad thing in some campaigns or groups, but can easily unbalance things.

 

Just a word of warning.

[Christopher]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Are you trying to say a fitting enemy must always have a weakness that can only be easily exploited by a guy with a vpp and not the rest of the team? I cant say that I agree.

Nope. It just sounded like the GM was unable to give characters chalenges that fit their powers. Sure, you don't want to put a weakness into every fight, but having none is not very good either.

 

Yes' date=' I get that you _can_ build something new for every fight, but you are still working under a set of limitations as to what you can bring with you in each fight, and how much preparation you have for a given fight. Only very rarely will it be enough more carefully built to exploit enemy weaknesses that it will be better than the 30% higher active point power set build with an elcon or a multipower.[/quote']

And there will be fights in wich you can't use the full range of your blast (wich you bought useable that way with OCV, CSL and of course the base power) either. Or fights in wich a brick can't use his STR to do damage every round, because the enemy moves so fast, or the brick is land bound and can't reach him.

 

And of course it ends in pretending I dont have a lot of imagination because I use easily compared power types. Sure' date=' you keep feigning superiority because your actual arguments dont hold water.[/quote']

No, I don't say that. Perhaps that way you understand better:

A Multipower (in contrast to just buying them normally) gives you cheaper powers, but less flexibility to use them.

A VPP goes the other way: You get more flexibility than just buying the powers, but of course has it's price in worser Active/Real point costs. Plus the limitation that you can't use them all at once.

 

If you don't want to pay that price, don't use it. If you don't want to adhere to the AP-Limits, just ignore them. I just prefer to work in/with the rules and think a lot of thought was put into them.

 

P.S.: For battle worthy, there are at least 3 Versions of Superman/girl out there using a (Cosmic) VPP. So I think some people actually managed to get a battle-useable VPP, or this is just a way to fit "all those powers ever shown" onto the sheet. And just think what Green Lantern can do with his powers (actually, from his JLU-interpretation he seem the most likely user of a VPP). It's not always about fighting, sometimes you need to make the bridge for the vilagers and can do more good that way than supergirl rushing in.

[Kyrinthic]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Nope. It just sounded like the GM was unable to give characters chalenges that fit their powers. Sure, you don't want to put a weakness into every fight, but having none is not very good either.

 

And there will be fights in wich you can't use the full range of your blast (wich you bought useable that way with OCV, CSL and of course the base power) either. Or fights in wich a brick can't use his STR to do damage every round, because the enemy moves so fast, or the brick is land bound and can't reach him.

 

Those things will be true as well if you are not prepared with your VPP, if you took melee powers, you are in the same place that brick is, and if you took ranged ones you are standing next to the blaster. You still have all the potential to have the wrong powers if you arent prepared. And when you are, well, you still have to compensate for being 30% behind to start.

 

No, I don't say that. Perhaps that way you understand better:

A Multipower (in contrast to just buying them normally) gives you cheaper powers, but less flexibility to use them.

A VPP goes the other way: You get more flexibility than just buying the powers, but of course has it's price in worser Active/Real point costs. Plus the limitation that you can't use them all at once.

 

If you don't want to pay that price, don't use it. If you don't want to adhere to the AP-Limits, just ignore them. I just prefer to work in/with the rules and think a lot of thought was put into them.

 

Thats the thing, given infinite real points and a 60 active point limit, the person who buys every power in the game can buy them all at 60 AP, the VPP can get the same thing but at 40 AP. Now obviously no game has infinite points, but in every other aspect of the game, the cost of versitility is real points. you want two different attacks? spend points for them. you want a high speed and a whole bunch of different attacks, spend points, or buy a multipower, which just costs points. But always, no matter how you go about spending the points or what powers you buy, each one can be 60 AP.

 

Unless its a VPP, which means you spend points for them first (VPPs are crazy expensive in real points), but then you are limited by the AP.

 

It just seems to stand out as an anomaly to me, but at least it sounds like the recognized that and fixed in in the newest version

 

P.S.: For battle worthy, there are at least 3 Versions of Superman/girl out there using a (Cosmic) VPP. So I think some people actually managed to get a battle-useable VPP, or this is just a way to fit "all those powers ever shown" onto the sheet. And just think what Green Lantern can do with his powers (actually, from his JLU-interpretation he seem the most likely user of a VPP). It's not always about fighting, sometimes you need to make the bridge for the vilagers and can do more good that way than supergirl rushing in.

 

A cosmic level power pool really is a whole different matter, and those characters aren't necessarily being compared to other equally pointed characters anyhow.

 

A cosmic power pool lets you do whatever you want, instantly, thats a pretty big differents from 'you can do things in a certain range as long as you prepare beforehand'.

 

A big old cosmic power pool, by the books, would leave you with less than half the AP of the other similar power level characters. And lets face it, superman did not hit half as hard as batman or aquaman, they just arent built at the same levels.

 

Sure, a cosmic power pool is all kinds of awesome, but really, a 150 active point power that lets you bring 60 ap attack powers to bear will not compare favorably to a 150 point multipower no matter how well you pick your powers.

 

But again, a small cosmic power pool for cool utility powers is great, but it will fail as a main attack power compared to the other options.

 

-Kyrinthic

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

it's in the Errata here on the website.

 

Could you point it out please?

I just searched both the 5er and 6e online Errata and did not find it in either.

[dmjalund]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

but a cosmic power pool will allow the character to bring a large range of NND attacks, entagles, area affects, affects desolids. making him able to affect people in ways that a straight AP cost just doesn't represent

[Kyrinthic]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

but a cosmic power pool will allow the character to bring a large range of NND attacks' date=' entagles, area affects, affects desolids. making him able to affect people in ways that a straight AP cost just doesn't represent[/quote']

 

a 60 AP nnd probably still wont hit as hard as a 150 AP Energy blast through the armor

 

But hey, if the 150 point multipower bought an NND well, you can see where I'm going here.

 

-Kyrinthic

[Hyper-Man]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

 

A cosmic level power pool really is a whole different matter, and those characters aren't necessarily being compared to other equally pointed characters anyhow.

 

A cosmic power pool lets you do whatever you want, instantly, thats a pretty big differents from 'you can do things in a certain range as long as you prepare beforehand'.

 

A big old cosmic power pool, by the books, would leave you with less than half the AP of the other similar power level characters. And lets face it, superman did not hit half as hard as batman or aquaman, they just arent built at the same levels.

 

Sure, a cosmic power pool is all kinds of awesome, but really, a 150 active point power that lets you bring 60 ap attack powers to bear will not compare favorably to a 150 point multipower no matter how well you pick your powers.

 

But again, a small cosmic power pool for cool utility powers is great, but it will fail as a main attack power compared to the other options.

 

-Kyrinthic

 

What exactly do you mean by 'cosmic' power pool?

 

The VPP only Advantage "Cosmic" is just a combined shorthand for the No Skill Roll to Change & Can Be Changed as 0 Phase Action Advantages. It has no connotation on special effect or broadness of the abilities contained within the VPP itself. Defining the broadness of available abilities is usually best accomplished by applying a Limitation to the Control Cost like "Fire Powers Only -1/2".

 

Active points are just one tool among many to measure character effectiveness.

 

There are many different ways to build multiple abilities where only 1 or 2 can be active at any one time.

 

The familiar:

1. Multipower

(no total active points tallied by Hero Designer for much the same reason that HKA will list bonus damage from STR where as HA does not. It's just not as easy to program for Simon)

 

2. VPP

(in many ways a just a variable slot multipower with a 'nearly' infinite # of slots)

 

The somewhat familiar:

3. A single power with the Variable Advantage

(This can mimic an 'attack multipower' with every variation of an advantaged attack ability except an UN-advantaged version or one that uses a different base power)

this also gets a single active cost since it is technically still a single power.

 

The less familiar:

4. Multiple different powers all built with the Lockout Limitation

(This approach can mimic a multipower with fixed slots very closely in utility as well as cost)

this is just a collection of different abilities so does not get a 'total' active cost.

 

Some of these construction methods can even be combined (variable slots in a Multipower or the abilities built with Lockout, Lockout on a VPP and other powers outside the pool, etc..).

I think any 'rule of X' that attempts to measure effectiveness needs to take give equal measure to the total of what the character can do at any single instance (what is being sacrificed for versatility) as well as the more commonplace active point and damage class caps.

[Christopher]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Those things will be true as well if you are not prepared with your VPP' date=' if you took melee powers, you are in the same place that brick is, and if you took ranged ones you are standing next to the blaster. You still have all the potential to have the wrong powers if you arent prepared. And when you are, well, you still have to compensate for being 30% behind to start.[/quote']

I think you should re-read the rules. In 6E you can always change them in a fight with a power roll and a full action, unless you apply a limitation.

And the roll can be bought of seperately form the action requirement, or even just lowered to a half phase with a +1/2 advantage. Note that both the reduced action requirement and the power roll elemination advantage only aply to the controll cost.

 

I confess, the example wasn't good. They do have way to much AP in for their pools. But I still think the versatility is always worth it. And if not, just buy your main attack outside of it and use it for all those low-AP utility-powers (flight, protection, ...) or don't start with a VPP in the first place.

Or just ignore the rules and play the way you like to.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

I think you should re-read the rules. In 6E you can always change them in a fight with a power roll and a full action, unless you apply a limitation.

And the roll can be bought of seperately form the action requirement, or even just lowered to a half phase with a +1/2 advantage. Note that both the reduced action requirement and the power roll elemination advantage only aply to the controll cost.

 

I confess, the example wasn't good. They do have way to much AP in for their pools. But I still think the versatility is always worth it. And if not, just buy your main attack outside of it and use it for all those low-AP utility-powers (flight, protection, ...) or don't start with a VPP in the first place.

Or just ignore the rules and play the way you like to.

Instead of telling people to re-read the rules perhaps you should re-read the OP that started this thread and specifically said:

I am in a campaign where I have chosen to build a gadget character' date=' with a VPP. I built him with a 60 point VPP (and like 15ish point control cost after some limitations). [b']I cant change powers in combat[/b], All my gadgets have a focus, etc.

[Christopher]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Instead of telling people to re-read the rules perhaps you should re-read the OP that started this thread and specifically said:

So, that is a problem of the build he made. When he thinks he needs the limitations and then complains about how useless his vpp is in battle, i'd say it's his own design that makes it less usefull in battle.

He can talk to his gm if he could take a 90 AP VPP, with not combat changeable powers. But that is the same question as asking his gm to allow a heavily limited 90 AP Blast or a Special Power in a framework: "Do my limitations allow me to override the guidelines in this chase?"

 

But I understood that he complained about the general uselesness of a high point VPP in Battle, not about the uselessness of his.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Again, if you actually read the OP he wasn't simply complaining, but asking for clarification because what HD told him didn't seem to match what was in the RAW and it seemed inconsistent with how other frameworks, specifically Multipowers, deal with AP...

[Christopher]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Again' date=' if you actually read the OP he wasn't simply complaining, but asking for clarification because what HD told him didn't seem to match what was in the RAW and it seemed inconsistent with how other frameworks, specifically Multipowers, deal with AP...[/quote']

Was answered with "Yes, that's the rule" and then drifted towards: "If that is the rule and we stick to AP limits, VPP is useless in combat". At least that what I read here. if that is wrong, I am sorry for misinterpreting.

 

Btw., about 60 AP only examples:

80 Controll (40AP) + 40 Pool (40 AP) equals an 80 AP power that can be use for any 80 AP power (including Blast) with -1 total limitations. There even is an example with a 80 Controll VPP in the book.

[Fireg0lem]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

The guideline our group uses is that a VPP with that can be changed in combat as a half or 0-phase action counts as an attack power 2 DCs higher than the best it can make, and other VPPs count as an attack power of the same DCs as the best it can make when evaluating our equivalent of AP caps.

 

I'd suggest actually talking to your GM about it. If your GM thinks that a 40+20 VPP that can't be changed in combat is a "60 AP attack power," you should play a different character because you will indeed suck terribly.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Was answered with "Yes, that's the rule" and then drifted towards: "If that is the rule and we stick to AP limits, VPP is useless in combat". At least that what I read here. if that is wrong, I am sorry for misinterpreting.

 

Btw., about 60 AP only examples:

80 Controll (40AP) + 40 Pool (40 AP) equals an 80 AP power that can be use for any 80 AP power (including Blast) with -1 total limitations. There even is an example with a 80 Controll VPP in the book.

 

Once again on the topic of reading the original post, the OP stated this was in 5th Edition. In 5th Edition, the pool sets the maximum AP, so there is no way for the player to buy a VPP that has a pool any bigger, or any smaller, than the maximum AP of powers he can put in the pool. That was changed in 6th.

 

In 6th, I would not allow your construct in a game where we were enforcing a 60 AP maximum, not because I think the VPP is an 80 AP (40 + 40) power, but because the pool can include 80 AP powers. I would allow it to have 60 Control (30 AP; maximum power AP 60) + 50 point pool (50) = 80 points for the VPP. It cannot have any power in excess of 60 AP. It would not be prevented by my "60 AP maximum" limit.

 

I would then assess whether the character's flexibility will cause balance issues in my game. If this flexibility will cause balance issues, then the VPP would have to be limited in some way to reduce that flexibility, or it would not be allowed. But that would be equally true of a 30 point VPP pool with a Control Cost of 30 (60 AP powers), which would only be a 60 AP power even if we accept control cost + pool cost = AP of the VPP as a single power.

[Christopher]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Once again on the topic of reading the original post' date=' the OP stated this was in 5th Edition. In 5th Edition, the pool sets the maximum AP, so there is no way for the player to buy a VPP that has a pool any bigger, or any smaller, than the maximum AP of powers he can put in the pool. That was changed in 6th.[/quote']

Now that is the information you should have told me earlier. Could have prevented much misunderstanding. I didn't know they were that different. Then yes, this is indeed very ineffective and luckily they changed that in 6E.

 

For my 80 AP VPP: I can just put a -0 Limitation on it that says "Attack Powers can only have 3/4 of the AP Limit" or "Attack Power count as 1/3 more expensive for AP Limitation". Problem solved permanently (and even scales with AID and XP bought increases).

But I doubt I have to do it, since I have to put a total of -1 Viable Limitations on a 80 AP (i.e., not something I could just ignore by switching it out the power). For an 60 AP Power it would need to be "only" a -1/2. And in either chase the VPP is full, so no more Defenses or movement till the next turn. And I have to switch them as a Full Action with a Power Roll (-8 or -6) (wich could mean a lot more Limitations may be viable) since I don't have any place for advantages on the VPP itself.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Why don't I take a 15 point VPP with a 45 point control cost (90 AP max) in a 60 AP game? I'll put some limitations on the control cost (and, for some, every underlying power). Let's say 4 charges (-1), Costs END (-1/2 - since charged powers normally don't), Specific SFX Only (-1/2 - my character's schtick) so the control cost drops to 15 and I pay 30 points. Then I build a standard character on 370 points.

 

Except I can have an 18d6 Blast, 4 charges (-1), Costs END (-1/2), Concentrate (0 DCV -1/2), OAF (-1), Other Limitations to Season (-2) for a last ditch effort. That can be any 90 AP attack power I want; Blast is just as an example.

 

Assuming a 60 AP limit, no other player can have an 18 DC attack - but I can, limited though it may be. And I can, given time, change the specific attack power for that inevitable rematch against the Big Bad...

[Christopher]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

The entire construct is ridiculous and has no value for this conversation.

As a GM I would say that you are barred from VPP's for a lifetime, after giving mich such a nonsense power.

[ghost-angel]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

What’s the overall Active Point cost of a Variable Power Pool?

 

Technically there isn’t one — generally speaking what matters for games with Active Point caps is the size of the Pool, not the overall cost of the VPP. But if you absolutely have to derive one for some reason, use the cost of the Pool, plus the Control Cost with any Advantages applied.

 

http://www.herogames.com/rulesFAQ.htm?ruleset=Hero+System+Fifth+Edition%2C+Revised&section=&keywords=VPP&dateString=

 

it's near the bottom of the page. Note, that it agrees with the majority of us (me included) that it's the size of the Pool that should matter more.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

To each his own.

 

To me, a GM imposing arbitrary limits that have no basis in actual gameplay balance is as much a problem as players presenting pure mechanical powers with no link to the character's abilities. But I'm a fan of assessing the whole character, and I find AP limits are not useful as hard and fast rule.

 

It's funny that you have spent most of this thread asserting that adding AP of the pool + AP of the control cost is an appropriate measure of the pool's impact on game play, but when I present a 60 point total, you call it a "nonsense power" that would cause you to ban me from VPP's for life. This is just an extension of your own example of a 40 point pool and a control cost sufficient to get an 80 AP power with -1 in limitations. It's a much greater spread between AP and pool than your example, but if it were presented as a Fantasy Hero spell pool, with all the standard Spell limitations applied for the relevant magic systems, they're probably -2 or so. Let's say Requires a Skill Roll (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4), OAF Wizard's Staff (-1). Another -3 for very powerful spells would not be all that uncommon.

 

You're assuming the player will present the construct all by itself, with no SFX or window dressing, rather than as part of a full character, with a power name and a background reason for the ability. It's a lot more obvious when presented in the context of "here is an abusive construct I could build" than when buried on a character sheet with all the backstory and window dressing, surrounded by other constructs and tied into an overall logical character build.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

http://www.herogames.com/rulesFAQ.htm?ruleset=Hero+System+Fifth+Edition%2C+Revised&section=&keywords=VPP&dateString=

 

it's near the bottom of the page. Note, that it agrees with the majority of us (me included) that it's the size of the Pool that should matter more.

 

Even Steve indicates the size of the pool is generally more relevant, from the phrasing of the response.

 

I wonder what the "official" AP of a multipower is.

[Christopher]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

1) My powerpool was not inteded to buy a 80 AP Blast, and I'm willing to take the -0 Limitation to make it a can't.

2) AP Limit is 80 for Standart Superhero, just the Attack Powers tend to be limited to 60(well, technically 70 but I guess most tend towards the 12 DC cap).

3) Using a VPP to build a 90 AP attack in a 60 AP setting? And you can just choose different attacks with it too? Perhaps, if you choose a Big Side effect in adition to the charges (it's a type of final/self disabling strike).

4) In heroic campaign, magicians need to take those limitations or spells would be to expensive and a MP/VPP seems to be rather uncommon among them (at least not nearly as often as in Superheroic games).

[bigbywolfe]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Actually MPs for magic systems, even in a heroic campaign, can be very effective.

[Christopher]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Actually MPs for magic systems' date=' even in a heroic campaign, can be [i']very[/i] effective.

Didn't say they can't, but the GM is disguraged from allowing them. They are more for building magcial equipment with multiple functions there.

Also, the neither the example mage from BR nor the one from 6E2 use a MP, despite the fact (or bacause of it?) that he would profit from it a lot. I guess the main reason is, that wouldn't have to take a lot of Limitations (like most example Spells do), so it's mainly how easy magic should be in the setting.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: VPP active point costs

 

Btw., about 60 AP only examples:

80 Controll (40AP) + 40 Pool (40 AP) equals an 80 AP power that can be use for any 80 AP power (including Blast) with -1 total limitations. There even is an example with a 80 Controll VPP in the book.

 

Emphasis added - see below

 

1) My powerpool was not inteded to buy a 80 AP Blast' date=' and I'm willing to take the -0 Limitation to make it a can't.[/quote']

 

Emphasis added. What changed between your two posts?

 

2) AP Limit is 80 for Standart Superhero' date=' just the Attack Powers tend to be limited to 60(well, technically 70 but I guess most tend towards the 12 DC cap).[/quote']

 

You seem to take the guidelines as hard and fast, immutable rules required to be applied in each and every game drawn verbatim from the rule book. They are not. From the OP, we were discussing a game with a 60 AP max, so that is what I discussed. The ability I posted fits the 80 AP cap if we set AP of a power pool as "pool + pre-limitation cost of control cost". It would not fit in my game, where it would be "AP of the powers the pool can hold". Both 90 and 80 are greater than 60, and would therefore violate a 60 AP cap as I would interpret the rules. It is clear that the "by the book" interpretation taken in the OP's game is causing, rather than correcting, balance concerns. To me, that's a good reason to conclude a "by the book" interpretation should not be adhered to.

 

3) Using a VPP to build a 90 AP attack in a 60 AP setting? And you can just choose different attacks with it too? Perhaps' date=' if you choose a Big Side effect in adition to the charges (it's a type of final/self disabling strike).[/quote']

 

That's not addressing an AP cap. It is addressing a more holistic view of the ability and the character. So why do we take that approach when a rigid AP cap allows a character to be too powerful, but not when it results in him being unable to play on the same level as his teammates?

 

4) In heroic campaign' date=' magicians [i']need[/i] to take those limitations or spells would be to expensive and a MP/VPP seems to be rather uncommon among them (at least not nearly as often as in Superheroic games).

 

I see a lot of magic systems that use VPP's. 6e makes that a lot more viable, by decoupling AP and pool size. I personally find Multipower Magic a problem as it encourages all spells to have about the same AP, but some seem to find it works in their games, often because spells are not player-designed.

 

And I find limitations on spells are not typically designed to make magic more affordable, but to make it feel like magic, not superheroes wearing starred robes and pointy hats.