Control and Create discussion: Need help!

satanicway · 09-07-2009, 07:44 AM

I'm having some problems with Control and Create powers.

I understand that this kind of generalistic powers are HIGHLY exploitable, and thats why gurps editors took great care of reducing possible exploits.
I dont think the powers are not good, for a general lower power campaign.

But i mostly play high powered games in gurps.
Atlast 500 pts games, and actually a 700 pts one. Since all players on my group really like overpowered characters, we mostly add -80% on almost all powers. (All logical and explainable reductors, but i really loose some time to find appropriated ones to reach that much)
Some of us, use itens of ~200pts with -80% reduction, giving effectivaly +800pts on the build, and so on.
(We use a house rule for enhancements/reductions , its addictive, but when you have more them 200% of enhancements, we use multiplicative, because if not, all powers with alot of enhancements would be underpowered, compared to some other powers that requires less enhancements to look cool. If anyone think its a problem or wrong, please tell me.)

Thats may be, because we are mostly anime, and hq (some marvel, some dc) fans, and we like powerful characters, that are mostly immune to normal TL8 weapons. (Some TL11 still hurts, ouch!)

Obviously oponents are as powerful or more them us, so thats not a game problem.

The problem is that, create or control dont do what we want.

Compared to the powers of other players, anyone who takes control or create feels almost ashamed of himself.
Characters fly at Mach 3 speed, burn steel as paper, or lift tons.
And for same points, he can do, well, less them 30 of damage with create, and some eventual bonus or penaltys.

A character that wants to have nature powers, would probably want to be able to creat a 200~ yards radius forest around himself with Create.
That solely would cost HUGE amounts of points.

I was thinking about letting add Super-Effort to Control and Create.
That seems ok. We can limit how much players can get of each, because its exponential, so their power stay in same level as the group.

But there is some design problems, mostly things that gurps restricted on those powers for them to become less exploitable. But we can control yourselfs, and stay on same powerlevel, we need more flexibility for this powers. But i would like to know, how much is the right.

I think that create should be able to do damage with solids and liquids, if correctly explained.
I think that control should be able to modify powers. Lets say you control lightning and have a lightning cone innate attack. You could use the Mirror rules to reflect some of the cone to hit someone on your back, same time as someone in front of you.
Or you could use Control to power block an enemy attack of same element in some way.

Some controls seems ALOT better them others, like control Gravity that is good, but others seems so weak its almost a joke, like control eletricity in medieval setting.
Some other problem i found: Why you cant use the insulator to prevent damage from an innate attack based on the element? I understand that 100% block would be too much, but not being able to defend yourself makes it alot less useful.

Its about giving it the versatility it should have, but would be totally exploitable.
I would like opnions on what create/control should, or sholdnt be able to do, and why.

Thank you. And sorry for my bad english.

Edit:
Shouldnt 260 pts in Control Fire, do more them, errr, just about nothing? You depends on fire. And it needs to be a BIG fire to cause damage, because control do no damage...
What would you do with Control Fire lvl100?

munin · 09-07-2009, 10:07 AM

I already listed a few good options in the other thread you started. In addition, Super-Effort is already listed as an option for Control (Supers, p. 26). In your campaign it might be reasonable for Create as well.

Create and Control aren't intended to do damage, they just happen to do some damage as a reasonable side effect of their nature. If you want abilities that do damage, build them on Innate Attack. If you visualize your character being able to create a football field sized inferno of fire -- that's probably an Innate Attack, not Create. And Control can't do anything if its element isn't present, so Control Fire 100 wouldn't do much unless you already had a couple houses on fire (so what I would do is ... put out the fires).

If you want extremely flexible attack powers, build your Innate Attacks with Selective and lots of enhancements, or allow the many options presented in Powers for extra effort and stunts, or build Wildcard Powers (Supers, p. 41) based either on Control or Create or another ability which seems more like a proper base ability. Wildcard Powers allow you to do anything you can reasonably describe as a function or side effect of your ability, which sounds ideal for your campaign.

For example, Pyro (Brotherhood of Evil Mutants) can't create fire, only control it, but still you would build his ability to attack people not with Control, but with Innate Attack (with a Nuisance Effect requiring an initial flame) -- plus a little bit of Control as well for his flame sculptures/pets. But the Human Torch, who can create and control fire, create a fire Aura, fly, etc. might be better built simply with a Wildcard Power.

"...200~ yards radius forest..." Even with Super-Effort, that's still going to be a lot of points. Sometimes the GM just has to say, yeah, the rules say it should cost this much, but this other cost I've pulled out of my head seems more reasonable for this application. On the other hand, being able to change the terrain of an entire battle just might be worth that many points.

"Or you could use Control to power block an enemy attack of same element in some way. ...Why you cant use the insulator to prevent damage from an innate attack based on the element?" Power Block (p. P168) specifically mentions using Control to block attacks. A successful power block with a Control ability grants +1 DR or +1 resistance per level of Control.

"...so weak its almost a joke, like control eletricity in medieval setting..." That probably would be a joke. So why consider it?

satanicway · 09-07-2009, 11:52 AM

WildCard is good, the only problem with it, is that it doesnt consider the flexibility of the power in question.

You will pay the same for:
Wild Card on Control Wood.
Them for:
Wild Card on Control Reality

Understand?

You will have alot less levels of Control Reality them Control Wood.
But for WildCard purpose, the points expand is what matters, so you will have the same points to expand in WildCard effects.
The problem:
The guy with Control Reality can justify ANYTHING, and the Control Wood one no.

You dont even need to reach Control Reality.

A guy with Control Wood is far less powerful them one with Control Solids, or Control Energys.
Or even a guy with Control Darkness, against another with Control Steel.

It needs a difference between a very broad power, or a very narrow one.

Another Deficiency of this, is that you cant add limitations. So it becomes too expansive to be useful. Because you can emulate powers, by paying x4 it to have 1 base power, and the ability to have 1 another at a time being emulated. Thats ok, but not if you compare with the guy that simple buy raw powers, and add -80% limitations. It makes the difference of power between the characters so great that its unplayable.

satanicway · 09-07-2009, 12:30 PM

I was thinking again about wildcard... its not that good...

Paying x4 is equal:
Paying the Base power.
Paying another Base power.
And them adding 10 other powers with Alternate Ability rule, based on the secound base power.
This works like wildcard. Have same price, and will have 10 fixated powers.
And you can add limitations as you seems fit on each power individually. So making the powers alot cheaper, so more powerful for same points.

How is this any good for Wildcard side?

munin · 09-07-2009, 01:35 PM

Wildcard Powers aren't necessarily the cheapest way to define a character, but they are one of the most flexible. You may be able to define a specific character more cheaply with alternative abilities, but then you're confined to those specific alternatives. It's a trade-off which may be better one way for one character in one setting and better another way for another character in another setting. And wildcard skills/powers aren't about cheapness, they're about simplification -- you can just write down Flight! and start playing.

Your argument about wood versus reality has a point. I think it would have to be up to the GM to set limits on what's available in the setting.

Also, as to the -80% limitation thing. It's up to the GM to make sure that limitations really are limitations. If a character who doesn't take limitations really is always less powerful than the character who does, then the limitations (or their application) may deserve a second look, or the GM may not be properly challenging/exploiting them.

naloth · 09-07-2009, 04:16 PM

Create can be very powerful or a good power to base a lot of alternate abilities on.

Frex, 6 levels of Create Light (10/lvl) can justify a blinding flash (HT-6 for a single target or HT-2 for a 6 yard radius) a torching light (6 damage/sec for 10 seconds over a 6 yard radius). If that's not sufficient, you can take an alternate innate attack (say a 6d laser beam) at 1/5 the cost.

Control is a bit trickier.
-For energy it can be a pretty good defense (Control Light would help protect you or your group from Create Light's abilities).

-For Solids and Liquids, you can use it to cause slams (weight moved x distance moved) though you need a pretty good level to do damage. Damage is exponential, though, so high levels can do immense damage.

-Forces vary wildly in usefulness.

Quote:

A character that wants to have nature powers, would probably want to be able to creat a 200~ yards radius forest around himself with Create.
That solely would cost HUGE amounts of points.

I wouldn't use Create for this. Offhand, it sounds like Obscure (vision penalty) + Affliction (DX/move penalty) would make good for a dense forest.

satanicway · 09-08-2009, 07:57 AM

munin:
Limitations like, Nuissance, Obvious, Noisy, Vows and Pacts, make for really stronger characters.
Sometimes it may cause some problems, but still alot better them paying more and have less powers.

naloth:
Nvm, the rules for collision may be great for Control damage.
Forces need to be reworked.

Create is still weak for me.

And about the Forest area, its not just an obscurate plus Affliction, the player wants a REAL forest, something he can control with Control Wood, and talk with Speak with Plants, and that will only block as much vision as a real forest.

satanicway · 09-08-2009, 12:04 PM

I'm working on a House-Rule for characters that have variable powers but not enough to be a Modular Ability.

I think Wildcard Power doesnt fit what i want very well, because of the problem with limitations, and difference of versatility in base powers.

As soon as i finish it, i will post it here for evaluation.

SuedodeuS · 09-08-2009, 01:08 PM

I'd ignore the Limitations issue. After all, the example in Supers certainly does - Requires Wings isn't a viable limitation for Lifting ST (or if it is it's at best a Nuissance Effect). Just note that you need to be using the primary ability in order to be able to get the benefit of the wildcard alt, so any instance in which you cannot use your primary (that is, cases where the Limitations come into play), you can't use the alt either.

As for versatility... well, if the base ability can only likely do a few things, just buy some Alternate Abilities for it. If you know you'll be able to think up some crazy uses (like Flight! being used to give extra Lifting ST), buy a Wildcard so that you don't have to limit yourself beforehand.
Also note that the final cost is determined by base cost. Sure, Control Fire doesn't justify as many cool abilities as Control Reality... but it costs a heck of a lot less!

EDIT: Forgot one more thing. You actually don't get quite 10 additional abilities for the cost of Wildcard. Each ability you built would have to have a +10% Link to the base ability, and the base ability would have to have a +20% Link to the Alternate Ability cluster. This could get quite expensive.

satanicway · 09-08-2009, 01:27 PM

You cant link powers that use the Alternate Attack/Power rule.

I understand that the example is bad, not the rule.

If you have control wood as a wildcard, you cant create a Ablative DR of Wood, even if it makes sense, because you cant add a limitation to a power that you are creating instantly for the situation.
Thats because it could be really exploitive.
Like adding huge levels of obvious and noisy, when you can call attention, and when you cant, you add low signature and no obvious neither neisy. So the limitations doesnt really work as limitations, because you are not bound to them.

Thats why you cant add limitations, but this also make the powers too expansive in some games where most of advantages are used with limitations.

09-07-2009, 07:44 AM	#1
satanicway Join Date: Jun 2009	Control and Create discussion: Need help! I'm having some problems with Control and Create powers. I understand that this kind of generalistic powers are HIGHLY exploitable, and thats why gurps editors took great care of reducing possible exploits. I dont think the powers are not good, for a general lower power campaign. But i mostly play high powered games in gurps. Atlast 500 pts games, and actually a 700 pts one. Since all players on my group really like overpowered characters, we mostly add -80% on almost all powers. (All logical and explainable reductors, but i really loose some time to find appropriated ones to reach that much) Some of us, use itens of ~200pts with -80% reduction, giving effectivaly +800pts on the build, and so on. (We use a house rule for enhancements/reductions , its addictive, but when you have more them 200% of enhancements, we use multiplicative, because if not, all powers with alot of enhancements would be underpowered, compared to some other powers that requires less enhancements to look cool. If anyone think its a problem or wrong, please tell me.) Thats may be, because we are mostly anime, and hq (some marvel, some dc) fans, and we like powerful characters, that are mostly immune to normal TL8 weapons. (Some TL11 still hurts, ouch!) Obviously oponents are as powerful or more them us, so thats not a game problem. The problem is that, create or control dont do what we want. Compared to the powers of other players, anyone who takes control or create feels almost ashamed of himself. Characters fly at Mach 3 speed, burn steel as paper, or lift tons. And for same points, he can do, well, less them 30 of damage with create, and some eventual bonus or penaltys. A character that wants to have nature powers, would probably want to be able to creat a 200~ yards radius forest around himself with Create. That solely would cost HUGE amounts of points. I was thinking about letting add Super-Effort to Control and Create. That seems ok. We can limit how much players can get of each, because its exponential, so their power stay in same level as the group. But there is some design problems, mostly things that gurps restricted on those powers for them to become less exploitable. But we can control yourselfs, and stay on same powerlevel, we need more flexibility for this powers. But i would like to know, how much is the right. I think that create should be able to do damage with solids and liquids, if correctly explained. I think that control should be able to modify powers. Lets say you control lightning and have a lightning cone innate attack. You could use the Mirror rules to reflect some of the cone to hit someone on your back, same time as someone in front of you. Or you could use Control to power block an enemy attack of same element in some way. Some controls seems ALOT better them others, like control Gravity that is good, but others seems so weak its almost a joke, like control eletricity in medieval setting. Some other problem i found: Why you cant use the insulator to prevent damage from an innate attack based on the element? I understand that 100% block would be too much, but not being able to defend yourself makes it alot less useful. Its about giving it the versatility it should have, but would be totally exploitable. I would like opnions on what create/control should, or sholdnt be able to do, and why. Thank you. And sorry for my bad english. Edit: Shouldnt 260 pts in Control Fire, do more them, errr, just about nothing? You depends on fire. And it needs to be a BIG fire to cause damage, because control do no damage... What would you do with Control Fire lvl100? Last edited by satanicway; 09-07-2009 at 09:34 AM.

09-07-2009, 10:07 AM	#2
munin Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Vermont, USA	Re: Control and Create discussion: Need help! I already listed a few good options in the other thread you started. In addition, Super-Effort is already listed as an option for Control (Supers, p. 26). In your campaign it might be reasonable for Create as well. Create and Control aren't intended to do damage, they just happen to do some damage as a reasonable side effect of their nature. If you want abilities that do damage, build them on Innate Attack. If you visualize your character being able to create a football field sized inferno of fire -- that's probably an Innate Attack, not Create. And Control can't do anything if its element isn't present, so Control Fire 100 wouldn't do much unless you already had a couple houses on fire (so what I would do is ... put out the fires). If you want extremely flexible attack powers, build your Innate Attacks with Selective and lots of enhancements, or allow the many options presented in Powers for extra effort and stunts, or build Wildcard Powers (Supers, p. 41) based either on Control or Create or another ability which seems more like a proper base ability. Wildcard Powers allow you to do anything you can reasonably describe as a function or side effect of your ability, which sounds ideal for your campaign. For example, Pyro (Brotherhood of Evil Mutants) can't create fire, only control it, but still you would build his ability to attack people not with Control, but with Innate Attack (with a Nuisance Effect requiring an initial flame) -- plus a little bit of Control as well for his flame sculptures/pets. But the Human Torch, who can create and control fire, create a fire Aura, fly, etc. might be better built simply with a Wildcard Power. "...200~ yards radius forest..." Even with Super-Effort, that's still going to be a lot of points. Sometimes the GM just has to say, yeah, the rules say it should cost this much, but this other cost I've pulled out of my head seems more reasonable for this application. On the other hand, being able to change the terrain of an entire battle just might be worth that many points. "Or you could use Control to power block an enemy attack of same element in some way. ...Why you cant use the insulator to prevent damage from an innate attack based on the element?" Power Block (p. P168) specifically mentions using Control to block attacks. A successful power block with a Control ability grants +1 DR or +1 resistance per level of Control. "...so weak its almost a joke, like control eletricity in medieval setting..." That probably would be a joke. So why consider it?

09-07-2009, 11:52 AM	#3
satanicway Join Date: Jun 2009	Re: Control and Create discussion: Need help! WildCard is good, the only problem with it, is that it doesnt consider the flexibility of the power in question. You will pay the same for: Wild Card on Control Wood. Them for: Wild Card on Control Reality Understand? You will have alot less levels of Control Reality them Control Wood. But for WildCard purpose, the points expand is what matters, so you will have the same points to expand in WildCard effects. The problem: The guy with Control Reality can justify ANYTHING, and the Control Wood one no. You dont even need to reach Control Reality. A guy with Control Wood is far less powerful them one with Control Solids, or Control Energys. Or even a guy with Control Darkness, against another with Control Steel. It needs a difference between a very broad power, or a very narrow one. Another Deficiency of this, is that you cant add limitations. So it becomes too expansive to be useful. Because you can emulate powers, by paying x4 it to have 1 base power, and the ability to have 1 another at a time being emulated. Thats ok, but not if you compare with the guy that simple buy raw powers, and add -80% limitations. It makes the difference of power between the characters so great that its unplayable.

09-07-2009, 12:30 PM	#4
satanicway Join Date: Jun 2009	Re: Control and Create discussion: Need help! I was thinking again about wildcard... its not that good... Paying x4 is equal: Paying the Base power. Paying another Base power. And them adding 10 other powers with Alternate Ability rule, based on the secound base power. This works like wildcard. Have same price, and will have 10 fixated powers. And you can add limitations as you seems fit on each power individually. So making the powers alot cheaper, so more powerful for same points. How is this any good for Wildcard side?

09-07-2009, 01:35 PM	#5
munin Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Vermont, USA	Re: Control and Create discussion: Need help! Wildcard Powers aren't necessarily the cheapest way to define a character, but they are one of the most flexible. You may be able to define a specific character more cheaply with alternative abilities, but then you're confined to those specific alternatives. It's a trade-off which may be better one way for one character in one setting and better another way for another character in another setting. And wildcard skills/powers aren't about cheapness, they're about simplification -- you can just write down Flight! and start playing. Your argument about wood versus reality has a point. I think it would have to be up to the GM to set limits on what's available in the setting. Also, as to the -80% limitation thing. It's up to the GM to make sure that limitations really are limitations. If a character who doesn't take limitations really is always less powerful than the character who does, then the limitations (or their application) may deserve a second look, or the GM may not be properly challenging/exploiting them.

09-08-2009, 07:57 AM	#7
satanicway Join Date: Jun 2009	Re: Control and Create discussion: Need help! munin: Limitations like, Nuissance, Obvious, Noisy, Vows and Pacts, make for really stronger characters. Sometimes it may cause some problems, but still alot better them paying more and have less powers. naloth: Nvm, the rules for collision may be great for Control damage. Forces need to be reworked. Create is still weak for me. And about the Forest area, its not just an obscurate plus Affliction, the player wants a REAL forest, something he can control with Control Wood, and talk with Speak with Plants, and that will only block as much vision as a real forest.

09-08-2009, 12:04 PM	#8
satanicway Join Date: Jun 2009	Re: Control and Create discussion: Need help! I'm working on a House-Rule for characters that have variable powers but not enough to be a Modular Ability. I think Wildcard Power doesnt fit what i want very well, because of the problem with limitations, and difference of versatility in base powers. As soon as i finish it, i will post it here for evaluation.

09-08-2009, 01:08 PM	#9
SuedodeuS Join Date: Sep 2008	Re: Control and Create discussion: Need help! I'd ignore the Limitations issue. After all, the example in Supers certainly does - Requires Wings isn't a viable limitation for Lifting ST (or if it is it's at best a Nuissance Effect). Just note that you need to be using the primary ability in order to be able to get the benefit of the wildcard alt, so any instance in which you cannot use your primary (that is, cases where the Limitations come into play), you can't use the alt either. As for versatility... well, if the base ability can only likely do a few things, just buy some Alternate Abilities for it. If you know you'll be able to think up some crazy uses (like Flight! being used to give extra Lifting ST), buy a Wildcard so that you don't have to limit yourself beforehand. Also note that the final cost is determined by base cost. Sure, Control Fire doesn't justify as many cool abilities as Control Reality... but it costs a heck of a lot less! EDIT: Forgot one more thing. You actually don't get quite 10 additional abilities for the cost of Wildcard. Each ability you built would have to have a +10% Link to the base ability, and the base ability would have to have a +20% Link to the Alternate Ability cluster. This could get quite expensive. __________________ Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat. Latin: Those whom a god wishes to destroy, he first drives mad. Last edited by SuedodeuS; 09-08-2009 at 01:12 PM.

09-08-2009, 01:27 PM	#10
satanicway Join Date: Jun 2009	Re: Control and Create discussion: Need help! You cant link powers that use the Alternate Attack/Power rule. I understand that the example is bad, not the rule. If you have control wood as a wildcard, you cant create a Ablative DR of Wood, even if it makes sense, because you cant add a limitation to a power that you are creating instantly for the situation. Thats because it could be really exploitive. Like adding huge levels of obvious and noisy, when you can call attention, and when you cant, you add low signature and no obvious neither neisy. So the limitations doesnt really work as limitations, because you are not bound to them. Thats why you cant add limitations, but this also make the powers too expansive in some games where most of advantages are used with limitations.