Skill used for Area of Effect Attacks

[Hrothgar]

I'm working on a Supers campaign, and I had a question about innate attacks/binding attacks/afflictions that use the Area of Effect modifier. I'm going to use one of my players binding attack for an example. In a nutshell, he can cause quicksand to form under someone's feet and trap them there (Pretty how the Quicksand power was listed on GURPS Powers 139).

So my question is, does he use an innate attack skill to use this ability? I thought that attacks with the area of effect modifiers were no longer considered ranged. Is this assumption wrong? I did notice that the modifier of Area Effect mentioned how you should handle misses. The way I picture how the attack works in my head, the player would just look at the ground beneath an enemy's feat and it would turn to quicksand. Would I take the Malediction modifier to represent this? (This is the only modifier that makes since).

I supposed the follow up question, if it's true that I need a malediction modifier to represent this attack, how would the attack operate without it? Do I assume that attacks with an area of effect work like a ranged attack, and then once it makes contact with an enemy (or object on a miss) that it would explode into an area of effect, sort of like a rocket exploding?

[Bruno]

AOE attacks are, without other modifiers, still a ranged attacks. It's much like lobbing a grenade (or firing a grenade launcher) - the effect is an area, but you're still making a ranged attack to place it. It's not like a Real Time Strategy videogame where you get a top down view and can place it precisely.

If your AOE is an emanation it is reduced to range 0 and you need no roll to place it, since it can be nowhere but centered about you.

If you want very very good chances to place it at range consider making it a Guided or Homing attack.

[Hrothgar]

Then I'm to assume that if I want to have an area of effect attack that works on sight, I should use Malediction? In my mind, that would make the players ability work like this: Player sees enemy. Looks at the ground beneath his feat. take modifiers for range and make a will roll. A miss, use the spread for Area of Effect.

[Anaraxes]

With Malediction, you basically have a spell, as in the Magic chapter. A failed attack roll means nothing happens (other than spending FP for the attack, etc). Maledictions don't scatter. Depending on how much you spend on the Malediction, range penalties will be more severe.

If you want the scatter, then Binding is by default a ranged attack; add Area Effect (even 1 hex) and it's worth tracking the scatter.

Keep in mind that you can target the hex where an enemy is standing at +4, rather than attempting to hit the enemy directly. They can try to dive out of the AE if it's small, but don't get the usual Active Defenses as if they were being directly attacked.

Special effects are up to you. The fact that it mechanically resolves like a ranged attack doesn't mean that there's a visible projectile in flight that could be intercepted or triggered early. See Low Signature and No Signature, if you're into stealthy power use.

[roguebfl]

You would still using Innate attack to place the centre of the AOE, but just with +Acc modified to represent the increased "by sight" accuracy in placement. after all you can still misjudge distance by sight too. (though remember especial with AoE you get +4 for aiming at the hex rather than a person in the hex as you don't have to hit the moving target just get close to them) Though if by sight you also means someone can prevent you from using the attack by covering your eye or other wise block your sight the you probably also want Sense Based, Reversed on it too.

You only want Malediction if you don't want the attack to be dodged (via Drop and Dive in the case of an AOE) but have to be resisted instead

[Hrothgar]

The issue with using this binding attack as is comes two-fold. One, as it's written in the book, if there is a barrier between the character and his enemy, that would block his innate attack. (Let's assume this barrier is glass, so he can visibly see his enemy). basically, he's controlling the earth below the enemy to cause them to sink into it. There wouldn't be a pathway from the character to the enemy. Second, I'm confused about what skill he would roll against. He's not really aiming it in a dexterious manner. If anything the roll should be based on IQ, because he's judging the distance. I don't have an issue with the area of affect missing, that would just represent misjudging the distance.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Special effects are up to you. The fact that it mechanically resolves like a ranged attack doesn't mean that there's a visible projectile in flight that could be intercepted or triggered early. See Low Signature and No Signature, if you're into stealthy power use.

even with out low/no signature the effect of AoE signature could be the earth beings to swirls in the area that people can dive away from before their actually sucked in stead of a projectile that can be watch incomming.

[Hrothgar]

I don't mind them being able to dodge the area of effect. My explanation for that is simply they feel the earth begin to tremble as it's happening. The main issue still is simply, what skill would I use, and what about the occasion where there is a barrier in the way? Also, reversed-sense doesn't really work either. He can activate his ability whether he's blindfolded or not, it would just end up being a random attack.

*After rereading Malediction, that really doesn't suit the power. When they say it works like a spell, it was very literal. even works on insubstantial enemies.

[Hrothgar]

Looking over the enhancements, the closest thing I think that represents this attack would be a reverse overhead. As in, the attack comes from below, thereby passing through cover. In some ways, it's more powerful because you can't under under a roof or some equivalent. I already put an accessibility, must be on ground (-20%). The original enhancement is worth 30%. Would 40% be a fair enhancement?

I still have the issue of what to use for the innate attack. IQ makes the most since. Should this be a 0% modifier?

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by Hrothgar

The issue with using this binding attack as is comes two-fold. One, as it's written in the book, if there is a barrier between the character and his enemy, that would block his innate attack. (Let's assume this barrier is glass, so he can visibly see his enemy). basically, he's controlling the earth below the enemy to cause them to sink into it. There wouldn't be a pathway from the character to the enemy.

For this you want Overhead (B107) not malediction to change the direction the attack, in the case from below so the only barrier you would need to worry about is between them and the ground.

Originally Posted by Hrothgar

Second, I'm confused about what skill he would roll against. He's not really aiming it in a dexterious manner. If anything the roll should be based on IQ, because he's judging the distance. I don't have an issue with the area of affect missing, that would just represent misjudging the distance.

You can always take the Perk (Based on Different Attribute) for Innate Attack if you want it IQ based instead DX (just like you can do the same thing the Psychic Guidance perk for spells) but this still don't change you still using the Innate Attack skill for centring AoE ranged bindings. You still might want want to define it Innate Attack (Gaze) rather than Innate Attack (Projectile) if you want (that for free) especial if you put Sense Based, Reversed (Vision) limitation on it

but do note Innate Attack (Gaze) is still DX at default unless you buy a perk for it