09-29-2020, 04:05 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
"ready instead of concentrate" enhancement?
For abilities that require a concentrate maneuver (example: summonable allies) but there are things which prevent concentrating but not readying (ie grapples using TG options) then I'm thinking maybe this could be considered a +5% enhancement? Basing this on 'requires ready' being -10 v 'require concentrate' being -15.
Legally speaking I guess you could do this by doing "reduced time" (turn concentrate into a free action, +20%) and "takes extra time" (add a ready before normal activation cost, -10%) where the net cost is +10%. Even though you can't legally turn attacks into free actions using reduced time, I'm wondering if this approach (example: using Maledicitons with a Ready instead of a concentrate) could be allowed as a net +10% modifier, if not the +5% earlier. |
09-29-2020, 11:49 PM | #2 |
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dreamland
|
Re: "ready instead of concentrate" enhancement?
I generally do +5% but sometimes it's a feature of the power modifier; Like how Psionics makes things into Concentrate maneuvers, I can see Biological always making abilities 'physical' and thus use Ready instead. That would be one of the special effects of the power modifier likely balanced elsewhere.
I've also done the opposite (-5%) to convert readies to concentrate. |
09-30-2020, 05:41 PM | #3 |
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: "ready instead of concentrate" enhancement?
I found that on PP22 but it makes me wonder which advantages that might alter, that might require something else like a ready instead.
Apparently the Attack only applies if you need to touch someone, so I guess if there were any Afflictions or Innate Attacks that didn't have Malediction (which already converts it) but I can't remember if there were any |
09-30-2020, 05:54 PM | #4 | |
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dreamland
|
Re: "ready instead of concentrate" enhancement?
Quote:
Honestly, I do feel like it should be spelled out when it happens, but I don't have an issue with it being put into the umbrella of tiny upsides and downsides that are explicitly written out. |
|
10-01-2020, 06:19 AM | #6 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: "ready instead of concentrate" enhancement?
Ready is a much better choice than Concentrate if you look at all the written rules about disrupting Concentrate or preventing it.
It's at least worth +20% (better than shifting attribute resistance) and likely +50% (Cosmic exemptions) if you play that Grapples prevent Concentrate but not Ready. |
10-01-2020, 11:20 AM | #7 |
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: "ready instead of concentrate" enhancement?
Cole's soft cap got me thinking about ALWAYS requiring will rolls to initiate concentrate maneuvers, but with a large basic bonus that can be reduced by the Weight Multiplier/Modifier table he had when a foe is atop or aside you (but not below).
Presumably why penalties would not apply when grappling some objects (if perceiving them as characters) is because you are "atop" a magic walking stick (it's bearing your weight) or "atop" a horse. For the mage who LIFTS (pickup technique) his staff: I guess there would be penalties, which is why mages would prefer light sticks, or enchant them to be weightless, to avoid penaltes to the will roll used to initiate concentration. TG23 notes that 'pinned' does not exist anymore, although it effectively seems to mean reducing ST to 0, which is easier for objects since they only have HP and not ST. Even things without ST have mass though and having something massive lying atop you can be distracting. Which is why instead of using trained ST as penalty I want the GWT table |
10-01-2020, 09:34 PM | #8 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Platform Zero, Sydney, Australia
|
Re: "ready instead of concentrate" enhancement?
Quote:
Then Requires Concentrate should give a substantially bigger discount than Requires Ready. |
|
10-02-2020, 08:01 AM | #9 | |
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: "ready instead of concentrate" enhancement?
Quote:
+20% follows "choose an attribute that works better for you" even if the attribute itself is a similar cost/utility. |
|
|
|