• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Marvel Mutants and Masterminds Downloads

Hand of Vecna said:
And as I mentioned, if you remove the X-Gene from a Mutant, that removes their Powers. By your logic, all Mutants should have the Device flaw on their Powers. Same goes for Spider-Man (irradiated spider venom), Deathstroke the Terminator (super-soldier serum that enhanced his strength, reflexes, and healing), the Fantastic Four (Cosmic Rays), the Flash (electrified chemicals), etc. etc. etc..

If you remove the X Gene it would indeed remove not only a mutants powers... but its "Mutant" nature, making it just a human.. however their is a great deal of difference in removing some metal grafts that were surgically attached in the first place. than their is removing someone X Gener that is part of thier genetic entire makeup.

So no by my logic not all Mutants would have the device flaw.. LIKE :) I said there is a huge scale of difference between a man with metal grafts under his skin than someones DNA being entirely re-written either from birth or by accident.

again the super serum is a chemical compound and chemicals can be negated by other chemicals...

So yes thier are certainly circumstances when I would apply Device flaw, but not in ALL circumstances. And as I stated in my original response, as per the new definition of what constitutes a device in M&M from the folks at Green Ronin I wouldn't apply Device to any of them now.. as under the new definitions they wouldnt apply.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Neo said:
If you remove the X Gene it would indeed remove not only a mutants powers... but its "Mutant" nature, making it just a human.. however their is a great deal of difference in removing some metal grafts that were surgically attached in the first place. than their is removing someone X Gener that is part of thier genetic entire makeup.

Yes, and in all my above cases, if you remove what I'd mentioned (the Super-Soldier Serum from Cap or Slade, the irradiatd spider venom, the cosmic rays, etc.), you don't just remove their powers, you remove a fundamental part of them, since their powers are an intrinsic part of their makeup.

Neo said:
So no by my logic not all Mutants would have the device flaw.. LIKE :) I said there is a huge scale of difference between a man with metal grafts under his skin than someones DNA being entirely re-written either from birth or by accident.

Not if it took several hours worth of intensive surgery to implant those grafts, and not it the only way to remove the grafts is potentially lethal to the subject & requires either several more hours of intensive surgery and/or Mutant superpowers. Wolvie's Adamantium skeleton is as intrinsic to him as his Mutant nature. Same goes for Cyborgs, too -- yes, if you pluck out a Cyborg's cybernetic eyes, you'd remove their Darkvision & Telescopic Vision and whatnot, but if you pluck out Cyclops's eyes, you remove his Optic Blasts, and if you remove a normal human's eyes, you blind them. Remove a cyborg's leg-pistons and they lose their Leaping power, but if you cut out Toad's leg tendons, he won't be making his super-leaps, either.

Neo said:
again the super serum is a chemical compound and chemicals can be negated by other chemicals...

And a Mutants powers can be negated with Genoshan Power Dampeners or Forge's Neutralizer, both of which are about as easy to replicate as an "Super Soldier Serum Negator" (probably easier, given the prevalence of Mutants in the MU).

Neo said:
So yes thier are certainly circumstances when I would apply Device flaw, but not in ALL circumstances. And as I stated in my original response, as per the new definition of what constitutes a device in M&M from the folks at Green Ronin I wouldn't apply Device to any of them now.. as under the new definitions they wouldnt apply.

In the Mutants & Masterminds book itself, it says a Device is "an external object," which (in my mind) clearly indicates that Wolvie's Skeleton & Cap's Super-Serum aren't viable candidates, since those are both very much internal things. How has the "new defintion" (which I admit I am wholly unfamiliar with and would greatly appreciate it if you could provide me a link to where I might see this new definition) make it any clearer?

I apologize if I come across as harsh, that is not my intent.
 

Hand of Vecna said:
Yes, and in all my above cases, if you remove what I'd mentioned (the Super-Soldier Serum from Cap or Slade, the irradiatd spider venom, the cosmic rays, etc.), you don't just remove their powers, you remove a fundamental part of them, since their powers are an intrinsic part of their makeup.

The Super Soldier Serum isnt an intrinsic part of Cap, it didnt make him super human it made him a perfect human physical specimen.. but without his training, experience and Shield to back that up (the true source of his powers).. then it wouldnt mean much..

Same with Wolverine his adamantium is tough and makes his bones unbreakable..but then what does that really mean to someone who has his Mutant DNA granted Regenerative abilities? he already has bone claws and breaking bones doesnt mean much to someone who can regenerate them in minutes anyway... The only real benefit his adamantium gave him was the ability to cut through materials he could not normally... so his adamantium is FAR from intrinsic to his powers.

Not if it took several hours worth of intensive surgery to implant those grafts, and not it the only way to remove the grafts is potentially lethal to the subject & requires either several more hours of intensive surgery and/or Mutant superpowers. Wolvie's Adamantium skeleton is as intrinsic to him as his Mutant nature. Same goes for Cyborgs, too -- yes, if you pluck out a Cyborg's cybernetic eyes, you'd remove their Darkvision & Telescopic Vision and whatnot, but if you pluck out Cyclops's eyes, you remove his Optic Blasts, and if you remove a normal human's eyes, you blind them. Remove a cyborg's leg-pistons and they lose their Leaping power, but if you cut out Toad's leg tendons, he won't be making his super-leaps, either.

You need to know a little bit more about his background to see that the surgery is moot, the whole reason the Weapon X program chose the subjects it did is because they all had uncharted regenerative abilities.. Maverick, Sabretooth, Wolverine, Deadpool etc.. so no his skeleton is not intrinisc to his powersin any way shape or form... its just that his regeneration was the only thing that could ensure hed survive the procedure...

You see the old definition was "A device is anything that if destroyed would cause the associated powers to be destroyed" with the obvious emphasis on something artificial and constructed.

So a cybernetic eye that has Infrared and Telescopic vision was at that time IMO a device.. you destroyed that "Artificial" eye it destroyed the powers associated with that eye..nothing else.

Wolverines Skeleton was artificial, man made "Artificial" and only took away his unbreakability... didnt affect any of his other abilities.

Super Soldier Serum was artificial, man made "Artificial" checmical compound and could with the apropriate chemicals be negated.

So why isnt the Mutant Gene a Device.. well because its naturally occuring, its part of thier build from the ground up.. yes if the gene is removed is causes the losss of thier powers, but it isn't man made it isn't applied to them after the fact and therefore is not "Artificial".

Fantastic Four, cosmic Rays.. now although this was applied after the fact, it was naturally occuring radiation AND DID alter them genetically, which is not undoable in the same way as blowing the laser firing hand (DEVICE) off the end of a Sentinels Arm.

How has the "new defintion" (which I admit I am wholly unfamiliar with and would greatly appreciate it if you could provide me a link to where I might see this new definition) make it any clearer?

I can't provide a link I'm afraid the new definition is in a book you'll have to wait to be released to read, but it very clearly states what is and isnt applicable as a device.

As for being harsh, don't worry about it... :D How I defined a device then is different from what i know the definition "IS" now. But whether you agree or not doesnt really matter, as I am merely explaining "Why" I applied the device flaw to thsoe things back then.. questions about other mutants and so forth are moot as the original question was why did i apply device flaw to the super soldier serum and adamantium skeleton... and i've explained the reasons why at the time I made them devices.

However the prime reason above all for both is because when I made the Super Soldier Serum and Adamantium Skeleton they were both constructed as automonously and not applied to thier associated Marvel Heroes.. as the point of them both was for something that could be applied to any hero from requests made of me on the M&M forums..along with other efects like the Techno Organic virus and so on.
 

Neo said:
You see the old definition was "A device is anything that if destroyed would cause the associated powers to be destroyed" with the obvious emphasis on something artificial and constructed.

Actually, the original definition for the Device flaw, as given on pg. 97 of the book, is "The power resides in or relies on a device -- an external object -- rather than the character. Typcial examples include weapons as devices for attack effect... If the device is taken away, the character can no longer use its powers." There is nothing in there "obviously emphasizing" that the Device must be artifical & constructed, and while Adamantium Skeletons and Super-Soldier Serums are indeed both artifical/constructed things, once applied to a subject, they are no longer external to the character (and the external part is one of the things that is emphasized). The Super-Soldier Serum is as much a part of Cap as the irradiated spider venom is a part of Spidey, and Wolverine's Adamantium Skeleton is as intrinsic to him as Psylocke's bionic eyes were.

Neo said:
So a cybernetic eye that has Infrared and Telescopic vision was at that time IMO a device.. you destroyed that "Artificial" eye it destroyed the powers associated with that eye..nothing else.

If you destroy the Cyborg's eyes, you also blind him. If you remove a Cyborg's Cyber-Lungs, you'll remove their Immunity (suffocation), but they'll also begin dying as their brain suffocates. If you remove a Cyborg's Cybernetic Heart, you'll remove their ranks in Super-Constitution, and you'll also almost instantly kill him.
 
Last edited:

There doesnt really seem much point in going over the same ground again.. my reasons for why I gave Wolverines skeleton and the super Serum the device flaw was asked and I've explained them.. I get that you don't agree with them, I really do.. but as i've also explained multiple times I wouldn't now do them as devices knowing now what I know.. Your notion of what applies externally differ slightly :) As far as I was concerned back then if it was constructed, and man made regardless of it being easy or not to remove (which is never actually stipulated as a condition for device btw) then it was suitable for the device flaw. Especially when as far as the criteria for a device flaw go e.g if it is lost then associated powers are lost were backed up numerous times in the storylines of the relevant heroes.

Like I say Vecna, I get that you don't agree with what I decided back then, but it has been done and I have absolutely no regrets about my reasons for the decisions to implement those things in that way back then, they made sense to me and that was good enough :) But there is little point as I say going over it and over again and again.. as it achieves nothing. the question as to why I applied it that way when i did those conversions..back then has been given and explained... I dont really know what else you want from me ro where else this particular line of query is going to go except back over what we've already been over :)

If you have other questions on why did others things I an explain then I'd happy to answer, or if you have some queries concerning recent conversions I've done or errors you noticed that need correcting etc... then I can totally help witht hose, but regarding why I used Device flaw before..on some of the earliest conversion..then I don't really know what else to tell you that I haven't already told you about the reasons for those decisions I made back then (which I still firmly support). I'd probably do quite a few of the conversions a little differently if I was to do them again these days (though thier PL's wouldnt alter much), largely due to me being aware of a great deal more design related info now than I was then... but hindsight rarely serves any prupose but to frustrate :D so I don't dwell too much on it .
 
Last edited:

Hi Neo. I was on your site and noticed that one of your favourite films is the Matrix... and I also notice that your user name is "Neo"... so how come you haven't converted Neo and Agent Smith? By the secondf and third films they had major super powers! You could even do Neo from all three films, showing the progression and power level's of each, and Agent smith could also be done like this (first as a standard agent, then being able to reproduce, then able to fly and stuff).

I know you're probably busy, but any chance of seeing these guys on your site?
 

daagon69 said:
Hi Neo. I was on your site and noticed that one of your favourite films is the Matrix... and I also notice that your user name is "Neo"... so how come you haven't converted Neo and Agent Smith? By the secondf and third films they had major super powers! You could even do Neo from all three films, showing the progression and power level's of each, and Agent smith could also be done like this (first as a standard agent, then being able to reproduce, then able to fly and stuff).

I know you're probably busy, but any chance of seeing these guys on your site?

Hello daagon69

Oddly enough there is no actual link between the matrix film and my now "alias" :D
The pseudo company name I create my works under is "Neo Innovations" as in "New Ideas" and I took the alias Neo as a user name on various forums because of that fact. Ever since then it has just kind of stuck, with everyone referring to me as Neo. :) but it wasnt a Matrix reference at the time.

However to answer your question the reason I hadnt done any Matrix conversions is two fold a) It never occured to me and b) Someone else did some on the Green Ronin Mutants and Mastermind forums some time back that were pretty good. I'd suggest a search on those forums for them.
However that said you never can quite tell what will pop up on my site next lol.
 




Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top