unclevlad

At a guess? Age. It's toooo old! *6* editions???? That's not new and interesting. That's Old Skool. Your DAD played Champions, dude!!!

So you're saying only a one-man shop, more or less, can qualify as an indie? Maybe, but that feels a little too narrow.

OK, but doesn't that beg the question...what *does* define indie? In book publishing, is Michael Anderle indie? Because his Kurtherian universe is huge now. He's got a publishing imprint he's running, too. What about his collaborators, who are using his imprint? And what's 'big'? Honestly, is even D&D 'big' right now? It certainly was in the early 3.0 to 3.5 days, but now? I'll grant that I've not even been in our B&N to check out the gaming shelves much the last several years, but my vague recollection is, it's been pretty dry. Now, of course, D&D is the antithesis of indie, given that WotC is part of Hasbro. Hasbro is most definitely Big. Fantasy Flight might have quite a few products, but what's their aggregate sales? Same with Onyx Path. I wouldn't necessarily say that having a staff disqualifies you from being indie.

By that interpretation, how much non-indie is left out there? I'll grant I'm not keeping up with the industry these days, but "big gaming company" that's not WotC seems largely an oxymoron. Shadowrun shrank down. Same with Storyteller's lines. Pathfinder? Not indie, but also weird because it's the last vestige of 3.5 D&D, and the later versions have...issues. Would you consider Steve Jackson Games to be a "big publisher?"

eepjr's got the sense of what I meant. I know the WH universe...very loosely. The point I was trying to make is, the source material almost never gets down and dirty. You're inferring details like the cycle time based on your interpretations. I and eepjr are pointing out...go to the source books and see how it's described *in action* there. So the point that it's a fast assault troop carrier is important. It's a #1 shield, in Star Fleet Battles terms...forward facing. And only #1. That's inherently massively limited already. As you note...get onto the flank of the darn thing. Light fast vehicles have armor for handling squad- and platoon-level weapons like machine guns and RPGs...but not serous guns like a helicopter autocannon. (Speaking in present day terms.) If PCs can exploit the shield drop, it's a totally useless vehicle in real combat, IMO. They already have ways to go after it. Here's one tactic that saw real world use. IEDs and mines were *devastating* against Strykers. The underside wasn't well armored. Option 2, if it's not a hovertank, a sufficiently resilient barrier across the road. Opton 3: anti-tank missiles often attempt to strike coming straight down, into the top face of the vehicle. This is often a weak point in the armor...especially for a troop assault vehicle.

What IS the original? You're inferring characteristics that may or may not be accurate. Does this feature actually get exploited in the original material? Does an enemy actually ever get attacks in while the shuriken cannon is firing? If the answer is No, then we have to believe the design intent is it is *not* exploitable, ergo the window is short. A rail gun like that can be multi-barrel and the potential RoF is *insanely* high. I'm hearing something like a capacitor-discharge kid of approach where you build and store a charge, then just *flush* the capacitor in next to no time to fire. If the answer is yes, it is occasionally exploited, then that's saying the window is open for a decently long period of time. Personally? I don't buy it's open for long at all. Or this thing would be toast. Forget the PCs doing it; ANY ENEMY would understand this one heckuva lot better from combat observations. And with laser weapons and computerized weapons control, 1/3 of a second is an absolutely *fatal* window of vulnerability. The enemy has the sensors, the sensors are linked into a fire control system, and the weapons have the kind of speed to exploit the characteristic. Think of these things in the original context. Doc: your "shields don't work in segments when the weapons fire" just means everyone just holds, if necessary. You're creating a window that lasts until the tank's next phase. Now, ok...another way to do this is "In a specific segment where the weapon fires, the shields have an Activation Roll." That represents a pretty narrow window where they're down. I'd never make this harder than a 16-, personally. Go back to the original post tho...that the way to take out this tank is to press attacks against it to deplete the shield generator, NOT wait for the potshot. Secondary aspect: is the FF the tank's only defense? Or does it have armor? The FF might be taking it from Pretty Tough to Darn Near Untouchable as long as it's running. OK, *now* you can impute the whole activation roll on the FF, only in the segment where the cannon fires, and call it a 14-. The armor takes a bit of a pounding from time to time. I'm still not sure that I'd ever let PCs improve on this, because again...enemy combat weapons systems have everything to exploit this, fundamentally built in. So if it can be done, it would be done.

Well, that force field flicker might be a small limitation, IF this is the main defense. But the limitation may relate to the attack power: Not when under a Continuous Attack. Because you can't drop the FF. As far as targeting it? Notionally, the window's on the order of MAYBE 0.1 seconds, and most likely...a lot less than that. Sci fi weapons usually mean you're including light speed energy beams and near light speed particle beams/bursts, so even a tenth of a second is a LONG time. I suppose in theory something like Find Weakness and Precog? Find Weakness to even realize the opening is there, then Precog to give you a shot to know in advance...but even with something like this, the time window's just so brief. Unless the source material suggests it's intended to be a (barely exploitable) weakness, it's just foo. The "drop, fire, restore" sequence is just a way of saying the attack doesn't require BS explanation like "it phases through the field." It's pure hand waving.

6E147-8. Bottom para on 147, continuing to 148. Discusses "Star Trek force fields" that get worn down. That's part 1. Part 2 might be an Aid, Always On, to the resistant defenses. This is the shield generator. I think you can throw in an Extra Time limit so the Aid only kicks in occasionally, but this might not be needed if the whole vehicle speed isn't very high. So you can try to burn through the shields, but you haven't got long before they're back to full.

At -1/2, you're only counting Body to see if it deteriorates. At -1, you're counting Stun...which means, practically every regular attack will wear it away. reference: 6E147. Second paragraph discussing Ablative.

Rather than say "remove this"...as others have pointed out, just make it cost 0 points. Farsi might have fit his background or image better.

It actually sounds like No Conscious Control on the telepathy. at the full -2. Or...for the time being? It's a major, and I do mean MAJOR, physical limitation. This is a serious affliction, until it can be controlled. When it's used in fantasy or supers (and I can offhand think of at least 2 authors), it's crippling. Until it's controlled, don't worry about the stats on the sheet because it's not a power. Note that the first thing is to put up mental defenses so that the power no longer exists. Which is the same as not having the power at all. Figure: until this power is controlled, you don't have a character; you have a victim. Of fate or a cruel universe if you like, but a victim nonetheless.

Yeah, ok, not real well said was it. 4. Assume attack hits, and does KB. Now make the skill roll, with a penalty based on total range and possibly more, to see if you the angle of attack you want. IF YOU DO, then the primary target travels in the direction you want...here, that's at the second target. If not, then the angle's a bit off and you need some mechanism to determine the actual angle. If your angle's wrong, the primary target can't hit the secondary target. And at this point, you have no control or influence, so another roll seems uncalled-for. The primary target is most likely 2m, so it's a hex-sized attack. Ergo, given the correct angle to the secondary target, AND of course assuming there is *enough* KB to reach the secondary...then the primary target hits the hex of the secondary target, and therefore the secondary target. The secondary target *can* dive for cover but can't dodge.

First, I loathe limiting an advantage. It might be right on *rare* occasions but it's something that should almost never be used, IMO. Second, RSR on the indirect is ill-timed in a granular breakdown. That's saying I need to make my geometry roll, or the attack follows the usual path. Indirect has value against a single foe, or when I only care about hitting the primary target and the ricochet aspect isn't anything I care about. The granular breakdown that makes sense to me: 1. Pick primary and secondary targets. 2. Mentally attempt to determine the angle of approach when the attack arrives at the primary target, so there's a chance the KB slams primary into secondary, and a simple, short path to do that. The implicit skill roll is here, but it's not a part of whether the power activates or hits. 3. Execute attack, see if hits. There's no reason to say the indirect doesn't happen; the attack roll covers getting the path of my attack to intersect my target. 4. Now it's determine where the KB actually goes, assuming there is any. In the mechanical process of making the attack, the skill roll should get rolled here; there's no point in rolling if the attack misses or if it does no KB. Hmm. A nasty part here is, if the attack hits and does good KB, but I mess up the KB angle...where does he go? Something to ponder......

That chart's got errors. Ugh. At least on the regular damage side...killing damage is actually a little simpler because there's no such thing as 1/2 of a damage class. For a power with more than the +1 Advantage: NORMAL damage: take the DCs added. Divide by (1 + Advantage). So, 4 DCs with +2 1/2 in advantages = 4 / 3.5 = 1.14. So it's 1 full die of damage for sure. The fraction? If less than 0.25, it's 0. If between 0.25 and 0.75, it should be 1/2 die. If >= 0.75, it's another full die. That method should be correct for any number of DCs and any amount of Advantage. 6 DCs added, +1/2 advantage = 6 /1.5 = 4. Bingo. 6 DCs, 3/4 advantage = 6 / 1.75 = 3.43. That means 3 1/2 dice. Bingo. Killing damage is weird because they handle +1/2d and +1d-1 in different ways, in different rules aspects.

Considering the math can get weird easily...+1/2 is not bad, but something like +1.25? Odd. Trick 1: go the other way. For +1/4, +1/2, and +1, you can divide the current net active points, THEN convert to DCs. +1/4 means 4 points towards the damage dice needs 5 points active. So multiply by 0.8. 20 active rolled * 0.8 would mean 16 active to boosting attack strength, so +3d6 normal or +1d6 killing. Similarly,, +1/2 means 2 points towards damage costs 3. Multilply the roll by 2/3. Not too bad. +1 is easy; just cut the bonus points in half. This works for Aids, Drains, or any kind of maneuver bonus. Weaponmaster +1d6 killing is 15 points of "aid". Trick 2: it shouldn't be hard to build a spreadsheet or work up a little program to be a DC calculator. Put in the points being added, put in the advantages, it shows the DCs you get out of it. Either construct a chart to print, or an app for use at the table. Java, that's easy, and packaging as a standalone file is easy. iOS and Android, the functional code is easy enough; I've only played a tiny amount in the Android cycle, but someone used to coding in it should find it easy. Now it's something that could be on your phone, and lord knows we all have our phones *everywhere*. Heck, there might be something on the app stores for all I know.

On the theoretical part, sure, but feasibility is a reasonable aspect of the discussion. You're suggesting a sequence like this, I think: a) Blast at basic strength. Bought as Constant. Attack hits, does its base damage. b) next phase, Aid to Blast. It automatically hits because the target of the Aid is Self. This adds points to the ongoing Blast so now it's stronger. From a rules standpoint, it's technically legal I suppose, but it's tending to give more Effect than it costs. If the Blast has just Constant and 1/2 End, each +1d6 would be 8.75 points, which means 2d or 2 1/2 d Aid. Aid gets the wonkin' big Self Only mod. You could add Constant to just let the Blast grow forever, and now, say, just Dodge to your heart's content...or, you could eschew the Constant and take multiple actions to increase the Blast to the limit of your Aid. Assume the latter; Now. given the slow fade rate, you may well be able to skip the Reduced END on the Aid. It's less necessary because you know it's guaranteed to be effective...there's no chance it'll be wasted. So you could buy 9d6 Aid for 27 points. One use is adding 31 points onto the Blast, for multiple rounds. That's gonna be 3 to 4 d6 mostly, depending on the roll, and a second use is likely to cap it out at +6d6. Now, to be sure, this is taking time, and time and actions are the currency of combat. And the points for the Blast and the Aid have to be distinct as they both have to be in use. So I might allow it, if the concept and full details of the implementation work for me.

I think one big question I'd have as GM is, why? What's the goal here? I get that it's cool, but Constant is rather potent, if potentially expensive. One of the other qualms is making major, fundamental shifts in the qualitative nature of the attack. You went from a normal attack with, say RedPen, to a killing attack. Those are generally radically different beasts, and they're 2 separate slots. You're asking for an end to a pretty central metarule: to do this kind of switch, normally, you have to terminate power 1, then apply power 2...which means another attack roll. I'm not saying I'd allow it, but it'd be a lot easier to buy if you just wanted to ramp up the starting damage to something higher. That's feasible...define the extra damage as needing Extra Time. If you include Variable Special Effect, then I might allow you to reconfigure all the damage with that, as it's ongoing. But note that this is now all 1 power, and 1 slot. Active points are going through the roof if you're talking a multipower or VPP. END cost per use is going up.

Sveta, I think you're overcomplicating. Why is any second blast needed? KB itself defines a movement rate. KB has a damage factor...1d6 normal for every 1" of KB. Or, if you prefer, call the inches of KB a velocity, and the sucker hit by the blast is doing a Move Through with velocity == KB, while using 0 STR, on the secondary target. No additional energy from the attacker is involved, so why is there a second Blast? massey: the conditions on the secondary attack are very complex, and there's no fixed damage per se. This is really a skill-based power stunt. So I'm thinking...yeah, ok, a CSL has to be used. It's not bouncing the power per se but it's similar enough, so in order to have a chance to hit the *second* target, treat that attack like the bounce. THEN, it needs a skill roll to aim. Anything representing that kind of sense of direction (and absolute direction sense might help). The roll has a range mod based on the entire distance...you to target A, then target A to target B. Last, perhaps an ad hoc -1 or -2 penalty on the roll because target A is hardly a precision missile weapon. THEN...if target A's body hits target B, the damage is as if A did a Move Through on B, as noted above. With full effects on both A and B...which probably means nothing serious, since A's velocity-based damage is not going to be high. Realistically, the hope wouldn't be to do a lot more damage...just to knock B down too.

Sveta: I mean the second.

But that's the problem with what OP is asking for. He can use an inexpensive, low-End base attack until it hits...then convert it to a major, high-damage, high-End attack. I can see the variable effects, perhaps, but I would never allow the number of DCs in the attack to be increased after the attack hits.

patransom, if doing that, then why the double knockback? The momentum doesn't come from any TK. TK to just guide...possibly, but that still feels wrong. Focus on hitting the target, then immediately refocus to aim at the next target? Ehhh...... Funk: bounce redirects the blast itself. To me, that's fine if the intent is to have the blast hit target 1, then continue to target 2...with conditions. To use the billiards analogy, I'd say that requires the initial attack to do knockback. If it doesn't, the collision (attack on target) becomes inelastic and the angle of reflection off the target is IMO poorly defined.

Bouncing isn't really right. Bouncing uses a surface to redirect the blast. That's not what I'm suggesting. If knockback happens, the target's gonna be moving. The point here is to capture being able to direct that movement in a useful manner. Indirect and Double Knockback do a good job, I think, of saying it's *possible*...now it's not a matter of power but a matter of skill, to pull it off. It is rather similar, I'll grant, to having the one CSL for a single-redirect Bounce, but it's also more flexible in that it would nominally work in any environment, as long as there's 2 opponents...or, just something sturdy to blast the target into. Rather than knocking him 20m away and now just having to chase him...different angle, smash him into a heavy wall or somesuch. Bounce requires a surface capable of reflecting the attack. PS: Billiards is not bad; it might work better to capture the sense of translating and rotating the scene in your head to get things to line up.

Stiletto is defined as 1/2 d6 AP. Sword-cane isn't much better; they sound cool but they're a desperation/surprise weapon, not a combat weapon. There's just not enough room in the cane body to have a weapon with any heft to it. Stats for a small sword are given; d6-1. What you're talking with the stiletto is actually basically expressly stated in Transform. A Minor Transform includes "changes that create minor combat-related effects" up to 2 DCs. Close enough. So you have the standard 1/2 d6 HKA OAF, Plus 1d6 Minor Transform. I'd prefer this approach. For the sword-cane, you actually don't need anything per se. The cane body is the sword sheath; the concealment's inherent. At worst, ok, throw in 1 or 2 dice of cosmetic transform. This would support that the cane handle...normally NOT well designed as a hilt...converts into a real hilt.

Another example is Rifts/Palladium SDC vs. MDC. And I think it's good to mention, because the cost aspect is going to be highly dependent on availablity and who has control of it. If this is something the PCs can do, and it's somewhat common, that might be when it should be MOST expensive. OTOH if it's something predominately controlled by the GM, and is kept fairly unusual, then maybe it can be a little cheaper. I do definitely think the broad campaign-rule approach makes sense because of this. And, *all* Cosmic powers should require DM review. I would also probably limit these to normal attacks only...never killing attacks. One bad roll with a killing attack and...POOF. I remember a game where this happened...the character had quite high DCV but no resistant defense. (Dangerous but often fitting.) IIRC, the char got surprised, got hit with 2d killing. 11 body rolled. OOPS.

Weird, hopefully fun idea. Efficient? Heck no. A 2-for-1 richoceting blast. To start: Blast, Double KB, and Indirect. Being able to shift the angle of attack is needed because having the bad guys line up for the attack is gonna be coincidental and rare. Seems like the best start, but any other ideas are welcome. My big question is, what skill and/or power, in a Combined Power approach, would fit, to get the poor sucker you're knocking around, to pile into the other poor sucker? KS: Geometry, with -5 penalty, and Absolute Direction Sense perhaps?