M&M 3e Re-recruitment - (closed)

[tunafish]

I get you on the "only AE". I mis-typed. Hero Lab wouldn't allow me to create a villain that was even 1 pp over. There are several, Strength-based AEs.

On the use of Move Object vs. Enhanced Strength. The thing I've noticed about MO is, based on S. Kenson's concept, it doesn't "Grab" like physical Strength. You make a ranged attack with normal Move Object & the grabbing-effect is considered non-physical contact. Otherwise, you'd be forced to make a ranged attack, then make a grab attack.

Kenson's pretty specific about it;

" ....You can move objects at a distance without touching
them. Move Object has no action/reaction; a moving object
cannot drag the character “holding on” to it, for example.
This effect is also not considered “physical contact”
or “touch” for effects requiring it ........"

Based on this interpretation, by making Move Object (1) Close & (2) Grab-based, you can turn the non-physical effect into a physical power resembling Strength. This is actually how comics writer John Byrne explained the superhuman strength of both Superman & Marvel's Gladiator. I like that explanation & it fits how M&M3e works. You should be able to modify effects to get the exact power you're looking for.

In regard to your comment, " ..... Using multiple overlapping flaws to make one power into a cheaper version of another is a widely frowned upon exploit .....", I counter by stating that character optimization is the very heart of RPG. Who doesn't want the most effective hero they can create? I've random-rolled enough goofball heroes to know it's better having "Rambo", than "Gomer Pyle". Also, keep in mind that in order to lower effect cost Flaws must be applied, which limit the overall power. That limitation is its own player-enforced balance, and balance is important to most gaming groups.

In the end, there's two questions: does the power make sense weighed against the game's guidelines, & will the GM allow it. With your help, I've corrected mistakes & I'm grateful for your input. Bonecrusher is "over-the-top" on purpose - superhumans should be. And, if optimization wasn't a key aspect of gaming, Steve Kenson himself wouldn't design PL12 heroes with 282 Power Points (the DCA Batman).

The rules are guidelines, not Papal Canon At least that's my opinion.

Thanks, Jemal!

 

[Voidrazor]

Here's my first pass at The Singularity. His background and bots are still to come. But I wanted to get a build up so that I'd have a clearer idea of what changes/nerfs would be necessary before getting to far on his minions (of Dooooom! Actually their builds will be much tamer than his).

The Singularity - PL 10

Abilities 16pp
Strength -1, Stamina 0, Agility 0, Dexterity 0, Fighting 0, Intellect 5, Awareness 0, Presence 4

Advantages 9pp
Connected, Defensive Roll 4, Eidetic Memory, Inventor, Skill Mastery: Technology, Well-informed

Skills 20pp
Expertise: Chemistry 4 (+9), Expertise: Physics 5 (+10), Perception 10 (+10), Persuasion 6 (+10), Technology 15 (+20)

Powers 101pp

Nanotech Enhanced Body
Immunity 30 (Fortitude Effects; Custom: reaction/continuous rather than none/permanent; Distracting, Removable) 13pp
Regeneration 20 (Removable, 2 per round) 16pp

P2P Mental Architecture: Immunity 10 (Common Descriptor: Psionic; Custom: reaction/continuous rather than none/permanent; Removable, Limited: no protection vs. attacks that work on objects) 4pp

Advanced Engineering Database: Quickness 12 (Perform routine tasks in -12 time ranks; Limited to One Task: Invention) 4pp

HUDlink to Nanocloud: Remote Sensing 4 (Easily Removable, Affects: 2 Types, inc. Visual, Range: 500 feet) 8pp

Nanotech Reconstruction: Transform 10 (Transforms solids to other solids, DC 20; Increased Duration: continuous, Increased Mass 1600 lbs., Increased Range: ranged, Precise; Distracting) 56pp
. . Robot Minions!: Summon 8 (Alternate; Removable; Multiple Minions 3: 8 minions, Type (General): Humanoid Robots, Mental Link; Distracting)
. . Bombots: Summon 10 (Alternate; Removable; Increased Range 2: perception, Multiple Minions 2: 4 minions, Mental Link; Distracting, Unreliable (5 uses))
. . NanoConstruction: Create 10 (Alternate; Removable, Volume: 1000 cft., DC 20; Impervious, Increased Duration: continuous, Movable, Selective, Subtle: look natural)
. . Warbot: Summon 10 (Alternate; Removable; Heroic, Increased Range 2: perception, Mental Link)
. .
Offense
Initiative +0
Grab, +0 (DC Spec 9)
Throw, +0 (DC 14)
Transform: Transform 10, +0 (DC Dog 20)
Unarmed, +0 (DC 14)

Complications
Motivation: World Conquest
Quirk: Loves Deathtraps
Power Loss: Electromagnetic Pulses hose defensive powers
Rivalry: Dr Destruction

Languages
English

Defense
Dodge 2, Parry 0, Fortitude Immune, Toughness 4/0, Will 2

Power Points
Abilities 16 + Powers 101 + Advantages 9 + Skills 20 (40 ranks) + Defenses 4 = 150

Notes/Questions - Is the flaw Distracting allowable with defenses this low? If not, how high would his defenses need to be for the flaw to be relevant enough?

Right now he can't personally hit the broad side of a barn. This is intentional to balance out his rather spectacular defensive powers. But should I add some accuracy to his Create with the idea that anything that gets around his defenses (incurable attacks, non-psi will afflictions, object-effecting psi, etc.) will probably one-shot him?

 

[tunafish]

Do all characters begin imprisoned?

 

[Jemal]

I get you on the "only AE". I mis-typed. Hero Lab wouldn't allow me to create a villain that was even 1 pp over. There are several, Strength-based AEs.

OK so now I'm confused, are they alternate effects of Strength or not? First time I mentioned it you said "the only one that's an AE is his Intimidation bump. The rest are stand-alone powers."

On the use of Move Object vs. Enhanced Strength. The thing I've noticed about MO is, based on S. Kenson's concept, it doesn't "Grab" like physical Strength. You make a ranged attack with normal Move Object & the grabbing-effect is considered non-physical contact. Otherwise, you'd be forced to make a ranged attack, then make a grab attack.
Kenson's pretty specific about it;

" ....You can move objects at a distance without touching them. Move Object has no action/reaction; a moving object cannot drag the character “holding on” to it, for example. This effect is also not considered “physical contact” or “touch” for effects requiring it ........"

That's to prevent people from using TK to deliver touch attacks or simulate other powers without an alternate effect. While we're quoting him: "Since Move Object works on things at a distance by definition, it cannot generally be reduced to close ranged. At the GM's Discrection, A Close Ranged Move Object effect may represent "tactile telekinesis" or a supernatural influence over objects you are able to touch, but such thing are better represented by the Enhanced Strength effect" I think that has more direct bearing on the question at hand, and is also 100% Steve.

It just allows you to make the initial attack as ranged rather than touch. If you're using it as a Grab Attack, you would have to start it with a ranged attack, just as when using strength you make a close attack, and then the grab proceeds as normal. IF not there's no grab, either with MO OR Strength.
Of note: lifting an object with Strength doesn't require a grab either, does that mean you could do Grab-based strength limited to lifting? Same concept, Move Object is basically just ranged strength.
EX: Lifting a 'platform' you're on and throwing it to simulate flight : You couldn't do this with STR either.

Based on this interpretation, by making Move Object (1) Close & (2) Grab-based, you can turn the non-physical effect into a physical power resembling Strength. This is actually how comics writer John Byrne explained the superhuman strength of both Superman & Marvel's Gladiator. I like that explanation & it fits how M&M3e works. You should be able to modify effects to get the exact power you're looking for.

I've never been fond of people trying to explain Comic-book physics with real world physics. It seems to miss the point of comics.. it's not SUPPOSED to be real, it's supposed to be COOL.

In regard to your comment, " ..... Using multiple overlapping flaws to make one power into a cheaper version of another is a widely frowned upon exploit .....", I counter by stating that character optimization is the very heart of RPG. Who doesn't want the most effective hero they can create? I've random-rolled enough goofball heroes to know it's better having "Rambo", than "Gomer Pyle". Also, keep in mind that in order to lower effect cost Flaws must be applied, which limit the overall power. That limitation is its own player-enforced balance, and balance is important to most gaming groups. In the end, there's two questions: does the power make sense weighed against the game's guidelines, & will the GM allow it.

OK, this is something I argue with people over a LOT. I'm often called a power-gaming, rules lawyering twink/munchkin because I like powerful/optimized characters. This is because not a lot of people realize there's a difference between optimization and exploiting/cheese. I CAN get any and every power I want. But a lot of it is incredibly cheesy. Using a flaw that ISN'T a flaw is exploiting loopholes.
The question is: What actual limitation does 'grab based' apply to a power that's already close-ranged and usable only for lifting? Can you really think of enough instances where it would matter enough to justify -1/rank, or is it something that will only come up in rare circumstances if at all? If it's the latter, then it's a complication.

[sblock=Example: How to get a lifting STR score of 84 for 1 point.. and not as an alternate effect.]
Move Object 84: Limited to Lifting, Limit:Only usable on objects, Concentration, Close-ranged, Grab-based, Distracting(You'll almost never use it in combat anyways), Feedback(If my invisible un-interactable force that's moving stuff is damaged so am I), Diminished Range 3 (It started as a ranged effect), Innacurate X10: 1 pp/6 ranks-13 = 1pp

Also, technically I could've taken the Innaccurate up to 100 (Flat flaws may be applied up to the rank of the power, but I kept it at the campaign PL instead.), which would give a -200 to the attack roll.. an attack roll which you'll never have to make. I also could've put in about a dozen other Limits that by themselves are perfectly good limits, but because of the way this power already works, would have had little to no impact on it.[/sblock]

With your help, I've corrected mistakes & I'm grateful for your input. Bonecrusher is "over-the-top" on purpose - superhumans should be. And, if optimization wasn't a key aspect of gaming, Steve Kenson himself wouldn't design PL12 heroes with 282 Power Points (the DCA Batman).

If Optimization was his point in designing that batman he would have done it in the regular amount of points rather than just dumping extra points. Giving someone extra free power is the exact opposite of optimization. And as I've said, I heartily agree that Optimization is Key, but there's a very fine line between Optimization and.. the other thing..

The rules are guidelines, not Papal Canon At least that's my opinion.

If you've studied history you know Papal Canon doesn't even live up to the name.

I used to be a big poster on the Wizco Character Optimization boards. My RL Friends and I took a few swings at Pun Pun, had him dead a couple times for a day or more before they figured out how to make him immune to that particular attack. (Anybody who doesn't know Pun Pun, be grateful and just move on!), but one of my favourite posts back there was the commandments of Practical Optimization. Not the regular commandments of optimization, 'thou shalt not loose caster level' and such.. those are mostly wrong (actually, my most powerful characters have broken every one of THOSE rules, but none of THESE rules), but these make sense.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thr...he_Ten_Commandments_of_Practical_Optimization

 

[tunafish]

Swapped Enhanced Strength for Move Object.

Found this on the WoTC "Character Optimization Board FAQ";

" So how do you tell the difference between cheating and min/maxing? Well, here are some cases:

- If the written rules allow for some combination, then it is min/maxing.

- If by changing some rule you can do something really cool, then that is cheating. "

so, Batman (and any Power Point-breaking character) cheats, if you hold the rules (15 pp per PL) as gospel.

I see what you're saying though. I just disagree

 

[Walking Dad]

Do all characters begin imprisoned?

No they don't. Some were imprisoned and rescued by Dr Destruction, others were approached in their hideouts.

---

Alright, I have some time for posting.

Can everyone applying please add the individual point cost to the effects/powers? I know HeroLab and the like don't do this, but I like to see it when reviewing characters.

 

[Graybeard]

Walking Dad- I updated my character sheet to include the costs of each power.

Thanks,

 

[Voidrazor]

I had a few questions at the end of my character post.

Notes/Questions - Is the flaw Distracting allowable with defenses this low? If not, how high would his defenses need to be for the flaw to be relevant enough?

Right now he can't personally hit the broad side of a barn. This is intentional to balance out his rather spectacular defensive powers. But should I add some accuracy to his Create with the idea that anything that gets around his defenses (incurable attacks, non-psi will afflictions, object-effecting psi, etc.) will probably one-shot him?

Since then it occurred to me that The Singularity could, as currently statted, build a device (up to 8 points as a free action) to get PL appropriate accuracy or whatnot. But, I'm already assuming that this would be limited to one item per round and that no particular effect can be used on a regular basis (as regularly used devices must be paid for with regular PP). With those assumptions is Quickness to invention checks OK?

 

[Walking Dad]

... With those assumptions is Quickness to invention checks OK?

Actually I don't allow Quickness to work with neither Artificer, Inventor nor Ritualist.
To simulate quick building and the likes, take a low-level variable effect instead, please.

 

[tunafish]

Actually I don't allow Quickness to work with neither Artificer, Inventor nor Ritualist.
To simulate quick building and the likes, take a low-level variable effect instead, please.

wha? So how Reed Richards & Batman whip-up quick devices is absent in your games?

Very Anti-Comics.

add: You're a comics fan?