[Powers] Super Cost Fatigue Limitation

[Azulan47]

So I'm working on writing up abilities for a new campaign where the powers have an exponential cost. However, I have yet to find anything that models that well. Initially I was considering applying the Super Effort modifier (Powers, p.58) to the Cost Fatigue limitation to tie the fatigue cost to the Size and Speed/Range Table (p. B550), but I'm not sure if the limitation value is correct, or if is going to work the way I think it does.

Basically this is what I've done:
Super Cost Fatigue (Varies)
Cost Fatigue (-5%/-10%) * [1 + Super Effort (+400%)] / [1 - Cost Fatigue (-10%)]
or rather
Super Cost Fatigue (-30%/55%)
You can truly push the limits of your power with increasing costs. Your power works as usual, but look up the Fatigue cost in the Size column of the Size and Speed/Range Table (p. B550), read across to the Linear Measurement column, and use that number as your Fatigue cost for the use of your power. If the cost is per use or per minute, this limitation is worth -30%. If the cost must be paid per second, the value of this limitation is -55%.

Is this limitation worth the effect? Is it clear how the limitation is supposed to work? Is there a better way of doing this? Any advice or comments would be appreciated.

[Kelly Pedersen]

I'm afraid this isn't going to do what you want it to do, at least as I understand it. What you're basically trying to do, if I read you correctly, is to give characters access to the Super-Effort enhancement on a trait, but with an escalating FP cost, rather than the flat 1 FP to get the full level of it?

If that's what you want, you'll need the Super-Effort enhancement applied to the trait you want it on, and then limit it with Costs Fatigue somehow. What I'd recommend is using the rules for applying Costs Fatigue proportionately to a levelled trait (Powers, p. 101), but halve the usual value of the limitation (essentially, apply an Accessibility limitation of -50% to the Costs Fatigue value, for "only when using Super-Effort").

So, for example, say someone's taking an Innate Burning Attack 10d, with Super-Effort. You want them to pay 10 FP if they're using the full 10 levels with Super-Effort, so you calculate the numbers based on 9 FP (because Super-Effort comes with 1 level of FP required built-in). 9 FP divided by the max level is 0.9, multiplied by the average level is 4.95, dropping fractions to 4. So you'd use the cost of Costs Fatigue 4 (-20%), but halved as above, for -10%. So your final writeup would look like:

Burning Attack 10d (Costs Fatigue, Variable, 1/level, only when using Super-Effort, -10%; Super-Effort, +400%) [245]

Under most circumstances, the character can fire a 10d burning attack all day. If they pay 1 FP, they can act as though they had Super-Effort on one level of the attack, doing 12d damage (the remaining 9d plus 3d for 1 level of Super-Effort). 2 FP does 13d, 3 FP does 14, 4 FP does 16, 5 FP does 20, and so on up the chart, until you're doing 100d by spending 10 FP.

[Azulan47]

That is not quite the solution I was looking for. Rather, something along these lines:

A PC is purchasing the Burning Attack previously described (10d), but without the Variable trait (just so that we're looking only at one facet). The mechanic I'm trying to describe has the fatigue cost increasing by the following progression:
1d = 1FP
2d = 2FP
3d = 3FP
4d = 5FP
5d = 7FP
6d = 10FP
7d = 15FP
8d = 20FP
9d = 30FP
10d = 50FP
And so on, following the Size and Speed/Range Table accordingly for the fatigue cost rather than the effect of the leveled trait. The Variable trait may not be necessary for this application. I do like the Accessibility (Only when using Super Effort) limitation for the Cost Fatigue, allowing me to modify the base fatigue cost for Super-Effort or even this proposed Super Cost Fatigue limitation. Hopefully the example makes the intent of the limitation a little clearer.

Note: The initial progression does look a little funny due to just following the table directly and rounding up. I need to find a better solution for that...

[Kelly Pedersen]

Originally Posted by Azulan47

That is not quite the solution I was looking for. Rather, something along these lines:

Ah! Ok, I see, sorry to misunderstand.

I'd suggest still using the Costs Fatigue (Variable) rules, but because the log FP per level will usually be lower than the simple per-level cost would be, reducing the final limitation value by 25%. So, continuing with the example, a 10-level burning attack that cost 50 FP at the top end would be effectively Costs Fatigue 27, for an overall limitation value of -135%, modified down to -102% (I'd just round that down to -100%).

[Azulan47]

While that solution does work, it could become troublesome when attempting to purchase additional levels of an advantage. I was trying to capture the elegance of the Super Effort enhancement. For example, when you buy Lifting ST with the Super Effort modifier you don't further change the enhancements or limitations when purchasing successive levels. The changes to the maximum effect (the Super Effort augmented ST) happens as a result of the enhancement. With the solution proposed there is continual fiddling with the limitations to reach the correct ratio of FP to effect with each time a new level is purchased.

I think if we can reverse-engineer the Super Effort modifier's relatively unique interaction with the Size and Speed/Range table by removing the inherent fatigue cost and "extra effort" application we will arrive at the modifier-enhancement I'm thinking of.

[Kelly Pedersen]

I understand the desire for something elegant, believe me! This might indeed be doable, but I'm afraid I don't have the math to work out the exact relationship. However, one thing I want to point out - this modifier, whatever it is, shouldn't be a bigger limitation than Variable Costs Fatigue. The way you have it set up, someone with simple Variable Costs Fatigue will always be paying more FP per level than someone with this pricing scheme, except at the very highest level, when they pay the same amount. That means this is definitely going to be less of a limitation than Variable Costs Fatigue.