Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elric" data-source="post: 3632886" data-attributes="member: 1139">Nope- I'm another potential player.  I'm an old friend of Matt's, though, so some of the time when I say "I don't think Matt will allow this" it's because I've actually talked to him about it (but I don't want to put words in his mouth so I'm not stating "Matt says this"- that's for him to do).  For example, Matt has mentioned how front-loaded a free/reaction Healing 1 power is before, so I'm pretty sure he wouldn't allow it.  Matt's busy at the moment, but I'll be significantly busier starting tomorrow and he'll probably be less busy, so I expect I'll be doing a lot less posting.Note that Matt said I was doing a good job of character critiquing on page 4- if he wanted me to stop he could email me and I would. You have a good point about the strength thing.  I guess I'm on unnecessary alert about flaws because it's so easy to create flaws that don't matter- but that doesn't mean that all flaws that could be interpreted in such a way that they don't matter are illegitimate.  For your saves: those are exceedingly low.  With 2 points higher apiece, they'd still have the effect you're looking for of being noticeably low.  The PL 10 archetype characters in the core book average 7-8 on their exotic saves- the lowest saves are the battlesuit (total: 17).   Note that every archetype character has every exotic save >=+4.  You have total exotic saves= 10 at a PL higher.  So I didn't pick 2 out of the air randomly- that would get you to about the "I'm vulnerable" feel for a PL 10 character.  It isn't min/maxing to avoid having huge across the board weaknesses- that's just a sensible thing to do.  Sorry if you took it as a rebuke for not creating a strong enough character.With your low saves plus Unreliable on Protection you really will get absolutely pummeled in combat.  It's easy to say that you don't mind this in a character, but I believe that this is a recipe for future unhappiness.  The campaign I GMd last year had a player who gave his character noticeable defensive weaknesses and even though the player was a very narrativist roleplayer, he still got frustrated when he was the most KOd PC by far.  Playing "Gets squashed like a Bug" Man gets old pretty fast.  This is actually a pretty common point of contention over on The Atomic Think Tank, but I stand by the idea (and think that Matt agrees- he picked PL 11, 165 pp and not PL 10, 165 pp for a reason) that a character shouldn't be significantly worse than his or her Attack/Damage and Defense/Toughness caps without a good reason (in particular, other abilities that will enable the character to still be effective in combat).  Nightweaver (Raylis, page 1) is a good example of this- Concealment means that many of her attacks will be sneak attacks, Power Attack can funnel the extra chance to hit to damage, and she has all of the other tradeoff feats, so she'll be effective despite not hitting her PL caps on offense.Lastly, I wouldn't mind comments on my build of Johnny Nitro, back on page 1.  Do your worst <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=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification