Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elric" data-source="post: 3692610" data-attributes="member: 1139">Oh, Steadfast is Immovable recast as a feat (in Mastermind's Manual).  Essentially it's the exact same except it doesn't do anything against slam attacks, and the bonus isn't lost when you move quickly (imo, for a low rank Immovable power, these are useful simplifications).I definitely understand this.  Captain America's shield, for example, should definitely be a device, not equipment.  I wouldn't try to get Impervious 5 through equipment or indestructible equipment where the equipment was particularly powerful.  I just don't have much to spent those 3 ep on since none of the modern electronic gizmos exist in 1889 <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I was thinking the function of Autofire 2 that lets you get a higher maximum amount of damage from using autofire.  Getting +1 damage for every point over defense you hit by won't be so good when the maximum amount you can get is (3/2, probably rounded down) 1 extra point of damage.  Autofire isn't limited by damage caps, but shurikens doing +3 base damage and +6 on a major autofire hit is quite good- if you wanted to take "super-strong shurikens" much stronger than Blast 3 (Autofire 2), you're almost certainly talking about a device, not equipment (this is Karl's call, but note that this is 1889- no rocket launchers in this setting!).</blockquote>

Verification