5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

[Magusinvictus]

Hello Hero Community!

 

Just a quick question regarding the use of the Independent power limitation in 5^th Edition (revised).

 

I was wondering why every piece of published equipment doesn’t have this limitation? Afterall, they must have been created by somebody who paid the points for them... Or am I missing something really, really obvious in the correct way to apply this limitation? Should it not be used for standard purchasable equipment in, say, a heroic level game? In that case, should I just forget about this limitation, as apparently the publishers have done for 6^th Edition?

 

Thanks for your advice!

[Ternaugh]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Independent assumes assumes that any points spent for the item are permanently lost if it is lost/stolen/broken. Given the size of the limitation, there should be a fairly good chance of one of those things happening. Enforcing the negatives of Independent, in my experience, just becomes a world of pain for the GM and players.

 

As for item creation requiring points paid for each one, there are a number of alternate creation rules in the Fantasy Hero rulebook which do not involve permanent spending of points. I highly recommend looking them over, if that's the type of items that you mean. If you are talking about a game where stuff is purchased with money, I really wouldn't bother working out the Hero power descriptions of most items. For example, running a Traveller style game in Hero, I generally just use the equipment lists from the original game. The only stuff that needs Hero stats would be things used in combat (weapons and armor, mostly). Keep it simple.

 

JoeG

[Christopher]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Generally equipment is:

- bought with money, not points

or

- as hard to replace as a flashbulb (wich mean you propably have a few to spare at ready to use).

 

Independent means, that if you use or loose it you not only have no replacement, the character points you invested in it are lost forever.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

If you have spent points on any non-Independent Focus then if you permanently lose the Focus, you get the points back to spend on something else (based on common sense, dramatic sense, GM calls, etc.). You are guaranteed to get either the points or the Focus back.

 

With the Independent Limitation, you are guaranteed neither.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Independent made sense as a method for a character in a fantasy setting to have an otherwise unobtainable by normal means magical item to start the game with.

It's not "attached" to the character. it's just adventuring spoils, a gift they obtained or something similar in the background of the character before the current campaign began.

 

So let's say you had a pc called "Bob" that you played in a long running game by one GM. Bob had gained a lot of xp an picked up his fair share of magical equipment in game (no points spent). The GM eventually stops running said campaign. Say another player in same game decides to run another campaign in the same setting with the blessings of the original GM. Players are allowed to bring in existing characters (including backstory and equipment) and more starting points are allowed for this. It makes perfect sense that the character needs to now "pay points" for that equipment he picked up in the last campaign (especially if there are other players that did NOT participate). Making the items Independent is reasonable if the items could be lost or stolen.

[Tasha]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Historically within the System as a whole. Independent was created to allow Magic Item creation using character points as a limiting way to prevent proliferation of said magic items within the campaign world. Also keeping it possible for Players so inclined to spend character points to create magical items. It's interesting to note that normal weapons in FH 1st ed didn't use the limit, only Magic items.

 

The Limitation was sucked into the Regular Rules with the release of 4th edition. It remained with 5th as that edition was originally conceived as a better explained version of 4e.

 

As you can tell in this thread the Limitation has caused a ton of problems for GM's. This is caused by Players who use it on Champions characters to shoehorn more powers into limited budget. Those players don't expect that most GM's will be "heartless" enough to make them permanently lose character points. So it causes contention in many campaigns and many GM's just don't allow it.

 

6e being a real "lets take a hard look at the rules" edition removed it from the game. It really never worked within the system esp when it was taken from it's intended Genre.

 

So in a 5e game it's really up to you to decide whether or not to use Independent on Weapons or not. It's probably easiest to not use it and to give players more points to spend with their Equipment pools than to actually rewrite each weapon and piece of armor.

 

Basically it's an ugly can of worms and it's a really good thing that it was removed from the core 6e rules IMHO.

 

Tasha

[Midas]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Hello Hero Community!

 

Just a quick question regarding the use of the Independent power limitation in 5^th Edition (revised).

 

I was wondering why every piece of published equipment doesn’t have this limitation?

 

Compare IND items to non IND items. Say Captain America's shield. It's an OAF. Somebody can take it away from him in combat. He can lose it. His sponsors can demand that he no longer carry it. But, somehow, mystically, it always finds him again.

 

OTOH, take Sauron's One Ring. That -2 limitation really allowed him to pump some points into all kinds of architecture spells etc. But when Gollum took the high dive, Sauron didn't get any points back, and a lot of worse things happened. Very few people would consider pumping so much of their points into an IND focus after taking a hard look at that example.

 

I never ran a player with the IND limit, but if I had, I would have pointed out the -2 and reminded them that such a severe limitation would have major consequences.

[drunkonduty]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

I never had a problem with Ind. Focus. I can't say I've seen it used much.

 

But if I were running a game and someone wanted Independent Focus I'd let them take it.

 

And sometimes I'd take that focus away from the player. I would also make it the target of enemies who want that wonderful toy for themselves. If things go badly the bad guys might even get the focus and use it against the PC. What I wouldn't do as a GM is destroy the Independent Focus without permission or some serious provocation from the player.

 

Oh and just for the record I'd say Cap's shield is IF. It's supposed to be unique.

 

cheers.

[Markdoc]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

As various posters have pointed out IND, is really only designed for powers that can - and some point will - be taken away permanently. There were a few people (like Tasha) who didn't like it, but it was an awesomely useful tool for making mcGuffins in any genre and fits very well with the Fantasy Genre. It's useful for more than just items: in the Campaign, I just finished, I used it for magical gifts/geases - like swearing an oath. You could gain cheap powers that way, but if the geas was broken, or the terms of the oath fulfilled, then the powers went away.

 

In an earlier game, I did the whole "Hid my heart in a duck's egg" thing - a powerful NPC had hidden his lifeforce away in his heart (ie: he bought all his stats down and then rebought them and his powers through an independant focus), which he cut out, embalmed and concealed in a pocket dimension hidden in a trapped room in a forgotten temple full of undead . That made him mondo powerful - but also vulnerable: when his heart was destroyed, (and really, that was inevitable) he ceased to exist.

 

It's not a power for all items. A cop's pistol isn't independant, and nobody "paid points for it". It was made by machines and the cop can always get another one if his is lost/destroyed - though there'll be some paperwork! It is however, a good way of stamping "for limited use only" on certain items that cannot be replaced.

 

It's also not a tool that sees a lot of use. But I use it and players in my games have used it, and powers have been lost, so it clearly works as intended.

 

Taking out of 6th was a mistake, IMO: it's a useful tool which can't easily be replicated another way. But it's not something I worried about, as it can simply be added back in as custom limitation.

 

cheers, Mark

[Killer Shrike]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

A) In heroic games Equipment doesn't cost points, and the gain and loss of Equipment isn't tracked mechanically. It's just line items on your gear list. The problem with this is that some characters have more Equipment than others and thus, by HERO point based logic are potentially more powerful. This seems to create a sort of cognitive dissonance in some people.

 

In more modern versions of HERO Resource Pools are recommended to allow the easy management of "free" Equipment (and other "Resources" like contacts, vehicles, bases, and so forth) while still putting a practical cap on it, and making characters with more than normal amounts of Resources pay a little extra to make their Resource Pool(s) bigger. Win win. I recommend you check them out and use them; I do and find them to work very well.

 

C) Independent is a very specialized limitation that was original designed for Fantasy usage back when HERO was a multi-genre collection of systems rather than a unified "Universal" system. It was basically a mechanical way to address a classic fantasy / magic game balance problem, namely the proliferation of magic items. It works very well for what it was designed for, and is very handy in genres where a person can have an object or externalized power source of some kind that is extremely exceptional or unique, and is not connected to a character in any way. Magic items are an obvious (and the classical) example, but it can also be used to put permanent effects on locations; Focus is almost always also applied with Independent but it doesn't HAVE to be.

 

If you think of the HERO System from a meta perspective, effect write ups and constructs are just game artifacts. Effect write ups have a point total which must be allocated from a pool of points. Some constructs such as characters, vehicles, and bases are "containers" of effects and possibly other constructs, and are nothing more than a pool of points. These two things obviously interlock with one another; containers with pools of points and things points must be allocated towards to allow containment.

 

Thus if a character has 350 points to buy effects with, you can also say that character is a game artifact with a pool of 350 points allocated to allow the containment of a collection of other game artifacts with an aggregate total of points not to exceed the available pool

 

Independent permanently carves off a chunk of points from a construct's pool into a separate smaller pool allocated to hold the effect Independent is applied to as a separate construct. It kind of promotes the effect to be a first class citizen; it is no longer just an effect, it is an encapsulated pool of points. The independent thing becomes a commodity. It can be lost, stolen, bought, acquired, lent, given, destroyed, whatever.

 

As an aside its not true that if a character has an Independent item and if they lose it for some reason they never get it back. They just don't AUTOMATICALLY get it back as with a focus. A character can take action to re-acquire an Independent item if they want; they can steal it back or otherwise re-acquire it in game through effort, circumstance, or luck. Also, just because something is Independent doesn't mean its just hanging out there begging to be taken from a character; a character can take whatever measures they are capable of to secure their Independent item(s). Just like real items in the real world. If someone steals your car, though it may be unlikely you can potentially get it back and you can also take further steps both to increase the difficulty of it being stolen and the likelihood of getting it back...such as installing a car alarm and lo-jack.

 

Further, Independent models how things like magic items are managed in pretty much every mainstream Fantasy RPG game, which avoids the inevitable Fantasy HERO friction point of magical treasure / loot not being usable because a character first has to pay points to buy the item(s). If Independent is in use, then characters can freely acquire Independent items and use them until / unless they somehow are divested of the Independent items themselves.

 

 

D) Independent was dropped from the mainstream rules in 6e for a reason...it is confusing for people who struggle with the underlying point / effect infrastructure of HERO. It's best used in a specific way in limited scenarios, rather than universally. The more modern Resource Pools subsystem is a competitive / overlapping mechanism that arguably works better and is also a broader solution that addresses multiple vectors. You can still use Independent in limited contexts if you want to; I still use it in my High Fantasy HERO material because a) I don't have the inclination to go back through a lot of material and characters and make a change of that magnitude, and it works fine as is and doesn't require "fixing".

[Christopher]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

In more modern versions of HERO Resource Pools are recommended to allow the easy management of "free" Equipment (and other "Resources" like contacts' date=' vehicles, bases, and so forth) while still putting a practical cap on it, and making characters with more than normal amounts of Resources pay a little extra to make their Resource Pool(s) bigger. Win win. I recommend you check them out and use them; I do and find them to work very well.[/quote']

Resource Point Pools can be found in the APG I 194.

 

If I ever should run a heroic level game, they are bound to be part of it. If it is one with magic/psyonic, I find some way to make those powers part of the pool too (so mages don't have to pay for spells with character points). It is simply the perfect balance.

Also something very intersting: The Rules for "Unique Items" in the Resource Point Pools sound a lot like a revival of the Independant Limtiation. So "independant" lives on.

[Sean Waters]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

You might well consider that the Independent limitation should only apply to the original manufacturer, assuming that they paid points for it which they lost. Subsequent owners have not had to pay points and so do not get the discount (points cost only really matters for equipment in heroic games to calculate cost).

 

Of course this is just a balance mechanism anyway: original manufacturers do not actually spend XP on manufactured goods or Henry Ford would have had no points to play with

[Killer Shrike]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Resource Point Pools can be found in the APG I 194.

 

If I ever should run a heroic level game, they are bound to be part of it. If it is one with magic/psyonic, I find some way to make those powers part of the pool too (so mages don't have to pay for spells with character points). It is simply the perfect balance.

Also something very intersting: The Rules for "Unique Items" in the Resource Point Pools sound a lot like a revival of the Independant Limtiation. So "independant" lives on.

 

That's exactly what I did with Here There Be Monsters. I defined five "special" resource pools by ability type / origin: Mystic, Psychic, Believer, Innate, or Professional. You can see it in action on the various Iconic characters presented.

 

This probably wont format well, but here is an excerpt; click the link for the full monty.

 

RESOURCE POOLS
Players start with free points with which to seed Resource Pools. The Resource Pools start off empty, and players use the free points they are granted plus any additional Character Points they elect to spend. 	
RESOURCE POOL 	POINTS

Equipment 	1 : 5
Vehicles \  Bases 	1 : 2
Contacts \ Followers 	1 : 2
Special Pools 	1 : 1

Each character has an allotment of 25 free points to seed their Resource Pools with during character creation, in addition to their normal Character Points. These 25 free points are not counted as part of a character's point total. Characters can also spend their Character Points and later Experience Points to further increase their Resource Pools.
Every 5 points of Equipment Pool costs 1 Character Point, every 2 points of Contact / Follower or Vehicle / Base Pool costs 1 Character Point, and every point of Special Pools costs 1 Character Point. However, the special costing for Vehicles, Bases, and Followers applies. For instance, each point of the Contact and Followers Pool spent on Followers grants 5 points with which to build a Follower per the Follower rules. This can get a little confusing in theory, but it works out in practice.
RESOURCE POOLS DESCRIBED

   Equipment Pool: a characters normal gear, including basic weapons (publically available handguns, rifles, shotguns), simple body armor, and consumer electronics. The Kit and Armory concept applies to Equipment; the number rating of the Resource Pool indicates how much gear a character can carry with them (their Kit); however they can have more things that are availble to them with time and access (their Armory). Gear that would be considered "standard" or "street" level in a typical Dark Champions campaign can be taken in a character's Equipment Pool; more uncommon and special gear must be taken in an appropriate Special Pool.
   Vehicles and Bases Pool: any vehicles and or bases a character might have. This Pool is particularly efficient as the normal pricing of Vehicles and Bases applies, so each point of Vehicle and Bases Pool spent on Vehicles is really 5 points of Vehicle effect, and similarly each point spent on a Base is effectively 5 points worth of Base.
   Contacts and Followers Pool: any contacts a character might have; the Well-Connected Perk reduces the cost of these Contacts as normal. With GM permission this Pool can also be used to pay for Followers; the normal cost structure for Followers applies so each point of Contacts and Followers Pool spent on Followers is effectively 5 points worth of Followers.
   Special Pools: Special Pools control a character's access to various sorts of special abilities and unusual gear. A character's Origin unlocks one Special Pool during character creation, but the other Special Pools are attainable as well with extra expenditure and GM permission. Each type of Special Pool is usable for different things, as described below. The Kit and Armory concept does not apply to the Special Pools, and a character can only change out abilities in their Special Pools with GM permission or as a reaction to events that transpire during the game as the campaign unfolds (such as if special gear is lost or destroyed).
       Mystic Pool: a character pays for enchanted items, spells, mystic powers, and other supernatural abilities they have out of their Mystic Pool.
       Psychic Pool: a character pays for any psychic items or powers they have out of their Psychic Pool.
       Believer Pool: a character pays for any relics and / or faith-based abilities they may have out of their Believer Pool. They can also take something ephemeral like a one-time boon granted by a powerful being.
       Innate Pool: a character pays for any innate Supernatural abilities, such as Lycanthropy or Immortality or other abilities that represent a Supernatural character's normal state of existence from their Innate Pool.
       Professional Pool: a character pays for any special or one-of-a-kind custom gear and / or signature abilities (i.e. Super Skills) they may have out of their Professional Pool. "Mundane" equipment considered to be Military or Advanced Military in a typical Dark Champions campaign can be taken in a Professional Pool by characters who can justify it with their concept.

UNLOCKING ADDITIONAL SPECIAL RESOURCE POOLS
Players can spend extra character points to unlock additional Special Pools beyond the one they have access to for free via their Origin. First, this requires conceptual justification and GM's approval. Second it requires the purchase of a custom Talent per Special Resource Pool.

Cost 	Ability
5 each 	Unlock Special Resource Pool  ([b]Mystic, Psychic, Believer, Innate, or Professional[/b]) 

[Killer Shrike]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Actually, on the subject of Here There Be Monsters, Resource Pools, and Magic items...several of the various "mystical" iconic characters have some kind of magic item...but the Alchemist Karl Bocher is basically a magical gadgeteer, with a lot of usable, lendable, limited charge items in his bag of tricks in his Resource Pools.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

I never had a problem with Ind. Focus. I can't say I've seen it used much.But if I were running a game and someone wanted Independent Focus I'd let them take it.And sometimes I'd take that focus away from the player. I would also make it the target of enemies who want that wonderful toy for themselves. If things go badly the bad guys might even get the focus and use it against the PC. What I wouldn't do as a GM is destroy the Independent Focus without permission or some serious provocation from the player.Oh and just for the record I'd say Cap's shield is IF. It's supposed to be unique.cheers.

The player gave his permission when he took the Limitation and saved all those points. And Cap's shield is not Independant by the source material. He always gets it back so it is just a regular Focus. Being unique doesn't automatically make something Independant. The shield would only be Independant if he lost it forever, or perhaps had to spend XP to make a new one. That simply isn't the case.

[Ternaugh]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

The player gave his permission when he took the Limitation and saved all those points. And Cap's shield is not Independant by the source material. He always gets it back so it is just a regular Focus. Being unique doesn't automatically make something Independant. The shield would only be Independant if he lost it forever' date=' or perhaps had to spend XP to make a new one. That simply isn't the case.[/quote']

 

The main issue that I had in my FH game is that the players really didn't understand that they had given that permission. It caused a bit of a stink in the group when they realized that items could be removed from them permanently, and that the points didn't come back. I decided that it wasn't worth the fight, and came up with an alternate system that didn't use Independent. When FH for 5th ed came out, I used its alternate item creation rules, and that worked fine for my game.

 

JoeG

[drunkonduty]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

@ Bigbywolf; RE. Cap's shield. You might be right, but I'm still inclined to say that it's an Independent Focus. Yeah he always gets it back but that doesn't mean it can't be lost permanently. The GM (ie: Marvel) has decided for metagame reasons (ie: the readers would spit) not to do so yet.

 

@Ternaugh. Yeah, the use of limitations (and disads) can throw people who are new to HERO. When I introduced some people to it last year I was very careful to explain that limitations and disads WILL have an effect. I tried to impart the sense that they're a way of defining a character, both good and bad aspects. And role playing opportunities. By and large they took to it in the right spirit.

 

cheers.

reason for edit: weird font.

[Markdoc]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

The main issue that I had in my FH game is that the players really didn't understand that they had given that permission. It caused a bit of a stink in the group when they realized that items could be removed from them permanently, and that the points didn't come back. I decided that it wasn't worth the fight, and came up with an alternate system that didn't use Independent. When FH for 5th ed came out, I used its alternate item creation rules, and that worked fine for my game.

 

JoeG

 

I never had a problem, because I made that point up front, when reviewing characters. Players were a bit pissed when powers (and points) were removed, but that passed over by the next session. We have a significant deal of experience in this: in the last game, 5 out of 8 PCs had at least one power with independant, and almost all PCs sacrificed points to build independant items or effects in the course of the game. A significant number of those effects (more than half) went away in the course of the same game (Note: that might sound like a lot, but it was a 5-year game

 

I did however have one player (long ago) who abused the system - even after repeated warnings - and built an elven character with an uber-bow. When the uber-bow met its inevitable fate, the player sulked for a bit, but the lesson was learned - and the new PC was marginally better balanced

 

cheers, Mark

[Ternaugh]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

I never had a problem, because I made that point up front, when reviewing characters. Players were a bit pissed when powers (and points) were removed, but that passed over by the next session. We have a significant deal of experience in this: in the last game, 5 out of 8 PCs had at least one power with independant, and almost all PCs sacrificed points to build independant items or effects in the course of the game. A significant number of those effects (more than half) went away in the course of the same game (Note: that might sound like a lot, but it was a 5-year game

 

I did however have one player (long ago) who abused the system - even after repeated warnings - and built an elven character with an uber-bow. When the uber-bow met its inevitable fate, the player sulked for a bit, but the lesson was learned - and the new PC was marginally better balanced

 

cheers, Mark

 

The last two groups that I've gamed with tend to be level-headed and to play limitations and disadvantages with enthusiasm. One player's "Slush Wall" spell not only required the character to carry around little casks of water, but took an extra segment to set up (as the ice crystals formed). Many spells required that he had previously set up a Change Environment to lower the ambient temperature and to increase the humidity. It was one of the coolest mages ever in my game, and his combat usefulness was all based upon small spells that didn't necessarily cause damage directly.

 

Before that, though, I'd get various players who would decide that certain things in the game just wouldn't really apply to them, and are usually upset when they really do. One gentleman insisted on playing a samurai with the serial numbers filed off, and went so far as to buy his fast draw through his scabbard, so that he could really boost it up. He then designed his character to have essentially a one-hit attack. He squeezed out a few levels with "first strike only" limitations, and then made sure that his attack would do huge amounts of damage, with "first strike" bonuses from skills. I warned him what the limitations meant, but he basically ignored me.

 

Now, he'd tweaked the character into a very powerful territory, and on the first swing, would usually beat the opponent. So, I put him up against a fencer, with a main gauche and a rapier. He got off the first swing, as usual, and the fencer aborted to block with the main gauche. That, of course, negated all of those fancy levels with their limitations to boost their power, and set up the fencer to deliver the next blow on the next Phase, which of course hit because the pc lacked defensive levels. The player immediately started arguing that his attack couldn't be blocked, and that he should have hit, and, well, you can predict the rest. He became quite livid when he failed the fast draw roll at a different time, and his fancy, spring-loaded scabbard shot his sword out just a little too fast for him to catch.

 

JoeG

[Christopher]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

That's exactly what I did with Here There Be Monsters. I defined five "special" resource pools by ability type / origin: Mystic, Psychic, Believer, Innate, or Professional. You can see it in action on the various Iconic characters presented.

 

This probably wont format well, but here is an excerpt; click the link for the full monty.

That is a ninterestign approach. I especially like that you start at 0 Points in all pools and have to buy them up. For some time now I consdiered a Star Trek game in the higher heroic powerlevels (to allow thigns like soong type androids or freed borg characters). Requiring the "normal" characters (the Starfleet level guys) to buy the resource points for their equipment would help a lot.

 

And Cap's shield is not Independant by the source material. He always gets it back so it is just a regular Focus. Being unique doesn't automatically make something Independant. The shield would only be Independant if he lost it forever' date=' or perhaps had to spend XP to make a new one. That simply isn't the case.[/quote']

I regard his shield simply as a "Indestructible Focus". As was pointed out in other places, this should have the downside that they are irreplaceable - you have to go after it and don't have a spare one back home.

[Sean Waters]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Cap has used several shields over the years, as well as any handy improvised items of a vaguely circular nature when he has not had immediate access to his own shield, so I'm not sure it is even a focus, let alone independent.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Buy the more extreme abilities as requiring the actual unbreakable Shield, and more skill like abilities as just OIF: Shield of Opportunity.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

@ Bigbywolf; RE. Cap's shield. You might be right' date=' but I'm still inclined to say that it's an Independent Focus. Yeah he always gets it back but that doesn't mean it can't be lost permanently. The GM (ie: Marvel) has decided for metagame reasons (ie: the readers would spit) not to do so yet.[/quote']

 

I;d say the fact that the GM will not take it away permanently indicates it is, in fact, a Focus. On every occasion where Cap has had to do without it for an extended period, he has received some form of replacement shield in fairly short order, so the points shift around, but don't vanish.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

Cap's shield has some sort of -1/4 Variable Limitation: "GM's Limitation Of The Week". Sometimes the GM is like meh, let's make it a Focus. Sometimes it's maybe an Activation or Burnout (hey look, bad bounce, it skidded under that car... now what?).

 

In the comics, he only doesn't have it when the story needs him to, and can improvise with garbage can lids or whatnot. If it's a Focus, it's at most an Inaccessible Focus, with some kind of "of opportunity" rider. -1/4, about the same as a Real Weapon or OIHID or IIF.

 

Edit: I hereby propose this as a new -1/4 Limitation: Iconic Item. Meaning, it's part of the character's identity and presence, the way Cap's shield or Thor's hammer is. He can be without it sometimes, but it's rare. If it's permanently lost or damaged or stolen, he can acquire an updated version (Iron Man's armor). Corwin's sword Greyswandir (Zelazny's Amber Chronicles) would have this also.

[Tasha]

Re: 5th Edition; the correct application of the Independent power limitation

 

I never had a problem with Ind. Focus. I can't say I've seen it used much.

 

But if I were running a game and someone wanted Independent Focus I'd let them take it.

 

And sometimes I'd take that focus away from the player. I would also make it the target of enemies who want that wonderful toy for themselves. If things go badly the bad guys might even get the focus and use it against the PC. What I wouldn't do as a GM is destroy the Independent Focus without permission or some serious provocation from the player.

 

Oh and just for the record I'd say Cap's shield is IF. It's supposed to be unique.

 

cheers.

 

Nope Cap's shield is NOT unique. At best it's a OAF "Shield" but probably Only in Alternate ID (AKA Only in Heroic ID) and Restrainable. I say that it isn't Independant because while people sometimes grab the shield, he never actually loses it for long (ie many, many issues). You can have Unique Foci ie Iron Man's Suit used to be unique. Thor's Hammer is Unique but neither of them have Independent Foci

 

Independent isn't appropriate for Superheroic games (4th edition used to make that VERY clear). The Limit is there for items that the PC invests Character points into, that when lost the PC doesn't regain the points (except for earning more XP). IT puts the GM in a really bad position, either allow the Player to get away with a -2 Limit that isn't ever enforced or take the item away permanently and destroy the character (or at least wound it's effectiveness).