Defensive Auras

[AlexanderHowl]

Reflexive would allow it to activate defensively while Independent would allow it to act independently.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Reflexive would allow it to activate defensively while Independent would allow it to act independently.

Reflexive would allow it to act without using your action. It would still be a power parry. Independent would allow it to continue an ongoing action, such that you don't have to concentrate to maintain it. It wouldn't allow it to make choices. You'd have to turn it into a Cosmic Defense of some kind, such that it always works and doesn't require a "nuisance" roll.

Besides, once you get up to ~200-300% in mods, you've paid for the defense, just in a different way.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by naloth

your whole argument is that Area provides DR or some other rules defined defensive value.

If you define Knockback as the latter, then sure, a Crushing Attack Area Effect which attacks anything that enters it (this can be done using Aura or Persistent, if there is any difference besides using a Ready to turn on an Aura vs an Attack to launch the Persistent, explanations are welcome) is capable of relocating attacking implements giving a new frame of reference to their Reach/Range.

Originally Posted by naloth

Simply quote that from the rules, with the quantity of protection Area provides in terms of DR, bonus HP, penalties to shoot, or whatever.

B378 "When you hit someone very hard, you may knock him away from you! .. If the target has ST 3 or less, knockback is one yard per point of basic damage! If the target has no ST score at all (like a wall), or is not resisting, use its HP instead."

Penalties to hit are per the Speed/Range table as usual. Knocking a target away increases the range. If someone shoots at you from 10 yards away and you have an aura which knocks objects within 5 yards with 1-3 HP back 5 yards, I could simply say the bullet goes right back and collides with the gun...

But that's brutal so instead, I think you would just add those 5 yards of knockback to the effective distance, so instead it's like they're shooting at a target 15 yards away. Which would you prefer?

Originally Posted by naloth

Permeable is area damage. It doesn't provide DR and there's no game mechanic for it stopping an innate or any other type of attack.

It's stopping the ammo, not the attack. If there's no ammo to knock back you can't use knockback to stop the attack.

Affliction (Persistent, Area Effect, Advantage: Warp) would warp away any bullets fired into the area (if they fail the HT check), so it would protect people from those bullets.

Crushing Attack (Persistent, Area Effect) is simply a variant on that, except instead of warping away bullets, it's knocking them away. Instead of an HT check, it is resisted by having high HP or Resistant to Knockback.

The "Aura" approach is just a variation on these where instead of setting up an AE using an Attack maneuver, you set it up by using a Ready to activate your Switchable aura.

Originally Posted by naloth

For a solid barrier you wouldn't (and arguably couldn't - it already blocks vision as a barrier). For a permeable one, you obviously would since it doesn't mention blocking vision.

Strangely it is Permeable which specifies "impedes vision" while Rigid doesn't mention impeding vision. Glass is a "material barrier" so I'm not sure that phrase implies obstructed vision.

Originally Posted by naloth

You mean if an attack can protect you when the attack says nothing about protecting you. I'd go with "no" since it's not part of the effect.

Knockback is commonly understood to be protective in the sense that shoving someone away with a long stick means they won't be close enough to bite you.

Knockback protects against weapons by preventing them from getting close enough to hit. Ammunition are an aspect of weapons.

Originally Posted by naloth

Let's look at it another way. Cyclops fires a cone effect optic blast with concussion against 3 bad guys. In the same second, one bad guy fires his gun at Cyclops. Because of turn order, we'll resolve one than the other and the possibility of the attacks interfering with each other (barring a power parry) is nil. If Cyclops had an area attack and zapped all 3 (no duration), same deal. Obviously neither area nor cone provide anti-projectile defense.

Presumably we agree on those game mechanics. Does your argument now shift to duration?

In this situation, Cyclops' concussive cone is already over before the bullet is fired. The bullet does not exist as a separate target until it is fired from the gun. This is definitely about duration. If Cyclops had "Persistent" on his cone, then I definitely think the bullet would get hit with it once it was fired.

Originally Posted by naloth

If you want to take everything to the absurd the ground would be affected by your "aura" causing you to bounce with each touch.

The Earth has too much HP to be knocked back by the 10d Crushing Attack that Alexander Howl asked about.

Originally Posted by naloth

Arugably along with the air, pressure, and potentially other useful things. Perhaps the power would short circuit trying to affect the ground you're touching?

Selective Area is obviously VERY important. It is possible to design abilities which can easily kill a user. Innate Attack (Melee -30%, Aura +80%, Always On -40%, Costs 9 HP -90%) for example, would suck up 9 HP from the user to kill a bug that crawls on you, and there's no avoiding it. This would be horrible for someone without high HP and Regeneration.

Originally Posted by naloth

Sure, but the character would need to decide what to omit... presumably on their turn or at the beginning of each. Selective Area allows control, it doesn't make the ability sentient and proactive.

If you read "Aura of Power", it specifies that users can specify either an opt-in system (nothing affected by default) or opt-out (everything affected by default) system.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Plane

If you define Knockback as the latter, then sure, a Crushing Attack Area Effect which attacks anything that enters it (this can be done using Aura or Persistent, if there is any difference besides using a Ready to turn on an Aura vs an Attack to launch the Persistent, explanations are welcome) is capable of relocating attacking implements giving a new frame of reference to their Reach/Range.

Yes, your honor, incinerating everything around me is only a defensive move. In fact, any time I strike first it's is always a defense, never an offense. Uh hmmmm...

In any case, knockback doesn't list among its perks that it defends against gunfire pre-emptively.... or at least not in my rule books.

B378 "When you hit someone very hard, you may knock him away from you! .. If the target has ST 3 or less, knockback is one yard per point of basic damage! If the target has no ST score at all (like a wall), or is not resisting, use its HP instead."

Obviously intended for when you "hit" things whilst attacking. Here you are being attacked instead.

Penalties to hit are per the Speed/Range table as usual. Knocking a target away increases the range. If someone shoots at you from 10 yards away and you have an aura which knocks objects within 5 yards with 1-3 HP back 5 yards, I could simply say the bullet goes right back and collides with the gun...

Rules quote? Typically the ability to reflect damage is DR with reflection. It seems like if the game designers instead damage reflection to be a property of innate attacks, it would have been mentioned in a supplement by now...

But that's brutal so instead, I think you would just add those 5 yards of knockback to the effective distance, so instead it's like they're shooting at a target 15 yards away. Which would you prefer?

Why should I (or anyone) have to choose between your various house rules?

It's stopping the ammo, not the attack. If there's no ammo to knock back you can't use knockback to stop the attack.

Again, that's a "game world" physics argument. Do you want to discuss what end effect will happen in the game world or do you want to discuss what the abstract game mechanics say? You can build the ability differently to fit what you want to happen.

Affliction (Persistent, Area Effect, Advantage: Warp) would warp away any bullets fired into the area (if they fail the HT check), so it would protect people from those bullets.

While I wouldn't have a problem with this, it's also horribly inefficient as a defense. Bullets with a HT 10 and DR3 would only "fail" the HT check less than 25% of the time with Affliction 1. Increasing the odds to 50% would multiply the cost x4. You're better off building a warp gate which has the game mechanic of being a tunnel that connects two different spots for the purposes of crossing distance.

Crushing Attack (Persistent, Area Effect) is simply a variant on that, except instead of warping away bullets, it's knocking them away. Instead of an HT check, it is resisted by having high HP or Resistant to Knockback.

So it will fail to do anything 75% of the time, unless multiply the base cost of the ability by 4 for each 25% increase effectiveness? Variants that give free stuff, usually are a good sign you're creating a point crock.

Strangely it is Permeable which specifies "impedes vision" while Rigid doesn't mention impeding vision. Glass is a "material barrier" so I'm not sure that phrase implies obstructed vision.

I was doing it from memory, but I thought it was the other way around.

Knockback protects against weapons by preventing them from getting close enough to hit. Ammunition are an aspect of weapons.

Let's keep this in terms of game mechanics and use Innate Attack instead. If one innate attack isn't affected (Iron Man's repulsors, for example) but another is (projected stone balls), then obviously it's not something in the ability at all. It's something you're projecting should happen based on what your view of the ability is.

The Earth has too much HP to be knocked back by the 10d Crushing Attack that Alexander Howl asked about.

Not of your treat every surface as a individual item, and its components as items. Furthermore, is "air" one target or lots of little NPCs like your bullets? You're in serious house rule territory by treating each bullet as an NPC.

Selective Area is obviously VERY important. It is possible to design abilities which can easily kill a user. Innate Attack (Melee -30%, Aura +80%, Always On -40%, Costs 9 HP -90%) for example, would suck up 9 HP from the user to kill a bug that crawls on you, and there's no avoiding it. This would be horrible for someone without high HP and Regeneration.

Except as written it would be 9 HP per minute you have it active.

If you read "Aura of Power", it specifies that users can specify either an opt-in system (nothing affected by default) or opt-out (everything affected by default) system.

I still don't have the supplement, and it sounds like it was created as an exception for a particular type of an ability, not as a template to create defensive innate attacks.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by naloth

Yes, your honor, incinerating everything around me is only a defensive move. In fact, any time I strike first it's is always a defense, never an offense. Uh hmmmm...

If you're referring to the thread title, Howl's "defensive" design was "No Wounding". When talking more broadly about how ongoing AE attacks work, they could obviously have both offensive and defensive applications. Heck, even Howl's design could be used to push someone off a building by running at them, so nothing is perfectly one-sided.

Originally Posted by naloth

In any case, knockback doesn't list among its perks that it defends against gunfire pre-emptively.... or at least not in my rule books.

There's no need for Knockback to go into detail about every single form of threat that could be put at a distance by it.

Originally Posted by naloth

Obviously intended for when you "hit" things whilst attacking. Here you are being attacked instead.

In this case, the user's input is either throwing the persistant attack or turning on the aura. Either way, from then on, it is the attack itself which is attacking (you don't have to spend further maneuvers) and it does so when something enters the area, which is before it gets to you.

Originally Posted by naloth

Rules quote? Typically the ability to reflect damage is DR with reflection.

The damage done by something you shove into something else is based on its mass and yards of knockback, how much damage the bullet originally did would not matter.

Originally Posted by naloth

It seems like if the game designers instead damage reflection to be a property of innate attacks, it would have been mentioned in a supplement by now...

The damage isn't being reflected, damage is a result of collision between things with mass, represented by HP.

Originally Posted by naloth

Why should I (or anyone) have to choose between your various house rules?

Neither is a house rule. The first is how knockback works in Basic Set, which I think assumes a foe at rest. The second is an expansion on how knockback works in GURPS Martial Arts against charging foes, which I think is a better fit.

Originally Posted by naloth

Again, that's a "game world" physics argument. Do you want to discuss what end effect will happen in the game world or do you want to discuss what the abstract game mechanics say? You can build the ability differently to fit what you want to happen.

Abstract game mechanics base knockback on HP or ST instead of actual mass. You can design ranged attacks as propelled objects with HP, or as throwing massless energy waves. Guns as we understand them are usually the first.

Originally Posted by naloth

While I wouldn't have a problem with this, it's also horribly inefficient as a defense. Bullets with a HT 10 and DR3 would only "fail" the HT check less than 25% of the time with Affliction 1. Increasing the odds to 50% would multiply the cost x4. You're better off building a warp gate which has the game mechanic of being a tunnel that connects two different spots for the purposes of crossing distance.

Very valid strategy. I had in mind the common approach of modifying it instead of buying higher levels. Using a Malediction as people often do because of cheap Will, or target some other attribute (don't bullets have IQ/DX 0?), or use Powers 40's "the GM should let unliving, homogenous, and diffuse targets add their SM to their resistance roll" which is unfriendly to small arms fire.

Originally Posted by naloth

Let's keep this in terms of game mechanics and use Innate Attack instead. If one innate attack isn't affected (Iron Man's repulsors, for example) but another is (projected stone balls), then obviously it's not something in the ability at all.

That, or innate attacks which don't propel objects can be represented different from those that do. In the case of "Fast Reload", the GM decides on the weight of the ammo you use, so it would make sense they also determine the HP of your ammo before and after firing.

I think what we're looking for is step 2 on Powers 55 "define how the attack delivers its damage"

Beams use Innate Attack (Beam), and Powers 66 continues that Gases use Innate Attack (Breath) for Cones, and Liquids can either use IA (Beam) or IA (Breath).

Projectiles use Innate Attack (Projectile) and while this covers stuff like fireballs (Burning Attack) it's pretty clear that stuff like Piercing Attack which is "Projectile" is intended to be a physical object.

One thing we need to keep in mind about Innate Attacks that leave physical objects behind: there are both upsides and downsides to that. Bullets may be subject to the laws of physics, but they can also get stuck in your opponent and require surgery to remove. Cannonballs that land on/in a boat can eventually make it heavier and sink.

The benefit of bullets creating encumbrance/infection comes with the drawback of the bullets being targets themselves, and potential appropriation by the enemy (melt it down and reforge new bullets against you, match the bullet to your gun, etc).

Obviously that level of complexity isn't specifically addressed in "Guns as Innate Attacks", because it is rolled into the combination of "Gadget" and "Fast Reload" and the GM is used to fill in the gaps.

There are major strategic differences between "I throw a dagger of metal" vs "I throw a dagger of ice" in terms of what Gadgets actually are, and how they are affected by the environment. Those are all aspects of how we define the incoming innate attack, and which of those details should influence the overall modifier costs.

Originally Posted by naloth

Furthermore, is "air" one target or lots of little NPCs like your bullets? You're in serious house rule territory by treating each bullet as an NPC.

Whether or not you treat small things as things on their own, or as part of a larger object, usually has something to do with proximity to other common objects.

Originally Posted by naloth

Except as written it would be 9 HP per minute you have it active.

B111 says "For abilities that produce instantaneous effects (e.g., Innate Attack), you must pay this FP cost every time you trigger the ability." I guess you're right since "you" only trigger an aura when you switch it on, and then the things touching the aura trigger it, not you.

I guess I didn't realize how much less Aura would suffer from the "Costs X" limitations. Come to think of it: "Uncontrollable" isn't "you" triggering the ability either, so maybe Uncontrollable attacks are free, even if that have "Costs Fatigue" or "Costs HP" normally? I'd have to look for more examples of these limits in action to know.

Originally Posted by naloth

I still don't have the supplement, and it sounds like it was created as an exception for a particular type of an ability, not as a template to create defensive innate attacks.

http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/p...ps/power-ups4/ uses "Cosmic" for rules exceptions, Aura of Power doesn't have any Cosmic modifiers, so it should be viewed as how the normal rules work.

Page 6 has the "Elemental Storm" meta-enhancement which includes Persistent/Area Effect and could help in understanding how those work:

On that turn and on each of his next nine turns (10 seconds total), the Storm blasts everyone (friend or foe) within 16 yards of the spot where he stood.

That correctly describes how it should work against people ALREADY in the area. But if you read B111 it elaborates on Persistent's function:

remain in place for 10 seconds, continuing to damage (or attack and possibly damage, if taken with Bombardment, p. 111) anyone entering or passing through it

"Entering or passing through" has no "so long as they are still in the area by the time the user's turn comes around" dlsclaimer, which means that if they're late arrivals you'd apply damage immediately and then continue to apply damage on their subsequent turns instead of the attacker's. Powers 145 examples of gas attacks make it clear, the attack takes effect immediately against everything in range unless there is an Onset limitation.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Plane

If you're referring to the thread title, Howl's "defensive" design was "No Wounding". When talking more broadly about how ongoing AE attacks work, they could obviously have both offensive and defensive applications. Heck, even Howl's design could be used to push someone off a building by running at them, so nothing is perfectly one-sided.

No wounding doesn't add utility. It's a limitation. As for using a KB attack to push someone off a building as an action, that sounds like a primary use for a KB attack.

There's no need for Knockback to go into detail about every single form of threat that could be put at a distance by it.

No, but "inferred" game world benefits would definitely fall into the "this is my house, these are my rules" area rather than be established game mechanics. I *encourage* house rules where they improve things for you. I just try not advertise to other that they are game mechanics.

In this case, the user's input is either throwing the persistant attack or turning on the aura. Either way, from then on, it is the attack itself which is attacking (you don't have to spend further maneuvers) and it does so when something enters the area, which is before it gets to you.

If you feel that makes a good house rule, go for it. As for everyone else, I'd suggest that adding an "defensive intercept" component vs attack powers to Aura or Persistent is somewhat overpowered considering everything both already offers. Cone/Area certainly don't give you the ability to intercept since they work on the "I go/you go" turn sequence.

It's also unclear how it would work vs other abilities. Spidey fires a (Bind attack) web ball. How much defense does an innate attack give you from that? How about instead if he uses a (Affliction) blind attack? Does that differ from the crushing web ball fired at you?

Are you basing it on the material? Spidey's webs are generally regarded as tough enough to restrain the someone with 10x his ST and hard to destroy.

If not material, are you basing it on level? Is it easier to incinerate the gooey Affliction 1 blind than the 3d cr innate attack even if it's the same material?

Is it easier to knock back spidey's webs than destroy them? Is it fair that an *attack* costing a fraction of the amount it would take to destroy webs would be cheaper than either the defense to protect you or the ability to counter it as a Power Parry?

Perhaps the character buying it should have called it "energy" instead and made it immune.

All of these are "game world" effects, but you're trying to infer mechanics from them.

The damage done by something you shove into something else is based on its mass and yards of knockback, how much damage the bullet originally did would not matter.

In the physics of your world, the amount of kinetic energy being countered doesn't matter?

Neither is a house rule. The first is how knockback works in Basic Set, which I think assumes a foe at rest. The second is an expansion on how knockback works in GURPS Martial Arts against charging foes, which I think is a better fit.

When my bullets declare a slam and take a Move, you can certainly use your "wait" to stop hit them. Otherwise, I'll resolve my attack normally and your "innate attack" which would work if my PC touched you or the area, will remain blissfully out of reach.

Very valid strategy. I had in mind the common approach of modifying it instead of buying higher levels. Using a Malediction as people often do because of cheap Will, or target some other attribute (don't bullets have IQ/DX 0?), or use Powers 40's "the GM should let unliving, homogenous, and diffuse targets add their SM to their resistance roll" which is unfriendly to small arms fire.

Maledictions don't typically work on things without the relevant statistic. After all, if it's a mental attack on will you aren't going to cower a bullet. Bullet's don't have a will to be affected.

I think what we're looking for is step 2 on Powers 55 "define how the attack delivers its damage"

The skill doesn't define the type of material used in the attack. As you noted below, a fireball and a stone are both under the projectile skill.

Liquids could be a beam as well as a laser.

There's no physical component required by any particular skill, and it certainly doesn't define an HP for an attack.

Beams use Innate Attack (Beam), and Powers 66 continues that Gases use Innate Attack (Breath) for Cones, and Liquids can either use IA (Beam) or IA (Breath).

One thing we need to keep in mind about Innate Attacks that leave physical objects behind: there are both upsides and downsides to that. Bullets may be subject to the laws of physics, but they can also get stuck in your opponent and require surgery to remove. Cannonballs that land on/in a boat can eventually make it heavier and sink.

I'm fully aware. Little details like this are generally a special effect. Granting immunity to bullets is worth buying as an advantage.

I guess I didn't realize how much less Aura would suffer from the "Costs X" limitations. Come to think of it: "Uncontrollable" isn't "you" triggering the ability either, so maybe Uncontrollable attacks are free, even if that have "Costs Fatigue" or "Costs HP" normally? I'd have to look for more examples of these limits in action to know.

Probably up to the GM how to handle it, with an option to reject combinations such as "unconscious only" and "costs FP". Uncontrollable inconveniences you already, so I wouldn't worry about assessing FP on top of it.

http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/p...ps/power-ups4/ uses "Cosmic" for rules exceptions, Aura of Power doesn't have any Cosmic modifiers, so it should be viewed as how the normal rules work.

For that affliction, for that purpose, probably with caveats we can't see since not everyone has that.

"Entering or passing through" has no "so long as they are still in the area by the time the user's turn comes around" dlsclaimer, which means that if they're late arrivals you'd apply damage immediately and then continue to apply damage on their subsequent turns instead of the attacker's. Powers 145 examples of gas attacks make it clear, the attack takes effect immediately against everything in range unless there is an Onset limitation.

There's no disclaimer the other way either. Entering or passing through is the trigger not the timing of when it's assessed. You've essentially conceded with your statement "subsequent turns" that it would only be applied once. If we were to take the general rule as "upon entering, passing through, and during the user's turn if they are in the area" you would risk getting hit multiple times per turn.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by naloth

No wounding doesn't add utility. It's a limitation.

You've already made this confusing comment before. Whether or not Crushing Attack knocks things back has nothing to do with whether or not it has No Wounding and everything to do with whether it has No Knockback or Double Knockback.

Originally Posted by naloth

"inferred" game world benefits would definitely fall into the "this is my house, these are my rules" area rather than be established game mechanics. I *encourage* house rules where they improve things for you. I just try not advertise to other that they are game mechanics.

It's not an inferred benefit, bullets are just an example of an object with HP which can be knocked back.

Originally Posted by naloth

As for everyone else, I'd suggest that adding an "defensive intercept" component vs attack powers to Aura or Persistent is somewhat overpowered considering everything both already offers.

It's not "adding" anything, "intercept" is what aura/persistent Area Effects do to things which enter the area.

Originally Posted by naloth

Cone/Area certainly don't give you the ability to intercept since they work on the "I go/you go" turn sequence.

I'm not sure if RAW you can combine "Persistent" with "Cone" like you can with Area Effect. It doesn't sound that unbalancing. "Cone" and "Melee" sound incompatible so it's hard to imagine it being compatible with "Aura" though.

Originally Posted by naloth

It's also unclear how it would work vs other abilities. Spidey fires a (Bind attack) web ball. How much defense does an innate attack give you from that?

You posted something earlier relevant to this:

Originally Posted by naloth

bindings have a DR of 1/3 and an effective HP (ST) equal to it's level.

Based on this, "Binding 10" should in theory have the same effective mass as an average human and be knocked back 1 yard per 8 points of damage.

Originally Posted by naloth

How about instead if he uses a (Affliction) blind attack? Does that differ from the crushing web ball fired at you?

I'm first going to need to know how you would define Spidey webbing people in the eyes as an Affliction, when I've seen people actually pull the webbing off of their face prior to the hours it normally takes to dissolve, and with their HT presumably not having anything to do with whether or not the webbing obscures their vision.

Spidey traditionally uses physical web cartridges (Limited Use - Fast Reload) so like with bullets, this gives GM grounds to declare what the physical aspects (weight, HP) are of the ammo before and after firing that ammo.

Originally Posted by naloth

Are you basing it on the material? Spidey's webs are generally regarded as tough enough to restrain the someone with 10x his ST and hard to destroy.

If his webs are weaker than mass would indicate, you could treat them as "very fat", if they're tougher than mass would indicate, you could treat them as "thin". If they're just hard to destroy, you could probably design buying some limited DR that applies to your Binding instead of you.

Originally Posted by naloth

If not material, are you basing it on level? Is it easier to incinerate the gooey Affliction 1 blind than the 3d cr innate attack even if it's the same material?

Powers 174 mentions "aiming Binding at the eyes to act as a blinding Affliction" as a "Target" interpretation of "Using Abilities at Default", but I'm still not sure how you would design this to reflect the ability of targets to pull off the webbing and free themselves prior to webs dissolving.

Originally Posted by naloth

Is it easier to knock back spidey's webs than destroy them?

To knock something back a yard, you must inflict HP-2 damage to it, which isn't enough to destroy most things. So yes.

Originally Posted by naloth

Is it fair that an *attack* costing a fraction of the amount it would take to destroy webs would be cheaper than either the defense to protect you or the ability to counter it as a Power Parry?

You don't have to pay anything for a defense to protect you against Binding: dodge it. Higher levels of binding have more ST/HP and would be harder to knock back, just as they would be harder to destroy.

Originally Posted by naloth

Perhaps the character buying it should have called it "energy" instead and made it immune.

If the GM signs off on it, sure. Bullets are already defined as non-energy though, as are thrown objects, arrows, etc. Energy attacks would lack the benefit of potentially lodging inside your opponent and requiring surgery to remove, and adding to their encumbrance.

Originally Posted by naloth

In the physics of your world, the amount of kinetic energy being countered doesn't matter?

No matter how much damage a bullet does, it drops to 0 damage past its Max.

Originally Posted by naloth

When my bullets declare a slam and take a Move, you can certainly use your "wait" to stop hit them. Otherwise, I'll resolve my attack normally and your "innate attack" which would work if my PC touched you or the area, will remain blissfully out of reach.

Backtrack from "shot" bullets a second. How would you treat a "thrown" bullet? Does it teleport instantaneously from the throwing arm to the target?

If I am bowling but the lane is full of plasma, the ball will always hit the pins before burning up?

Originally Posted by naloth

Granting immunity to bullets is worth buying as an advantage.

Crushing Attack has a cost :) This is not immunity to bullets, it's more like "increase the effective distance between you and the shooter".

If a gun had Max 100 and you were 75 yards away and could bend space to double the distance between you and anyone within 100 yards, you would increase the effective distance to 150 yards and the gun would do no damage. But that wouldn't be "immunity to bullets" because if the gun was fired from 25 yards away, doubling the space would only increase the effective distance to 50 yards, so it would still be within its Max and inflict damage.

Knocking something back doesn't nullify its momentum (this is why a Charging Foe can continue to spend MP to re-close distance with you) so it would keep traveling forward. What would stop it is surpassing its Max, because at that point we treat guns as not doing harm.

Originally Posted by naloth

Probably up to the GM how to handle it, with an option to reject combinations such as "unconscious only" and "costs FP". Uncontrollable inconveniences you already, so I wouldn't worry about assessing FP on top of it.

B254 mentions "you may take psi abilities as potential advantages, in which case they will function as if they had the
limitations Unconscious Only and Uncontrollable until fully paid for." and some advantages available as psi have inherent FP costs, like Warp (Teleportation -10%) [90] which is worth 45 as a potential advantage.

One worry I would have with "Uncontrollable doesn't cost FP" interpretation is someone could take "costs 20 FP" on an ability they didn't intend to use, and just rely on the 'free' attacks made by the subconscious against obvious enemies. That's why it might work better if the Unconscious ability could commandeer your FP, but not below 3 FP.

That has a side benefit of reducing your FP below 3 making your ability no longer Uncontrollable though, so it's not an ideal solution either.

Originally Posted by naloth

For that affliction, for that purpose, probably with caveats we can't see since not everyone has that.

You can read Kuroshima and PK's discussion about the mechanics at http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=72459 if you don't have the book.

Originally Posted by naloth

There's no disclaimer the other way either. Entering or passing through is the trigger not the timing of when it's assessed. You've essentially conceded with your statement "subsequent turns" that it would only be applied once. If we were to take the general rule as "upon entering, passing through, and during the user's turn if they are in the area" you would risk getting hit multiple times per turn.

I didn't say they'd get damage during the user's turn if they were not in the area when it was activated. You're supposed to get damaged in 1 second intervals, so if you get damaged immediately upon entering (presumably on your turn, unless someone threw you in or teleport you in on their turn) then exactly 1 second later would be your turn again.

[Aldric]

This thread reminds me of an attempt to create a flaming aura some time ago. Started with Aura, realized it didn't do what I expected, began adding modifiers and finally dropped the whole idea and went with a different thing.

I think there is a rule somewhere that, when you create an ability, you use the easiest method.

So in the end, you want to deflect bullets? Buy a penalty to attacks against you, or DR.

[AlexanderHowl]

The idea was not to deflect bullets (the idea was to create an aura that pushes away attackers and that amplifies punches [aura attack independently of their controller after activation]). The question becomes what occurs to melee weapons and ammunition from attacks that occur after the aura is activated.

For example, an opponent hits the character with the aura active with an aluminum baseball bat. The baseball bat is not destroyed by the aura's attack, but we can either assume that its momentum is reduced by the aura or, after it imparts its momentum to the character, it receives new momentum from the character's aura. In the former case, it would first reduce the damage by its damage and then the difference would be the new momentum (if negative, it would probably act as a new attack reversing the original trajectory). In the latter case, it would probably function as a new attack tangential to the original trajectory.

So, a ST 10 character would deal 1d+2 crushing damage with the aluminum baseball bat. The aura effectively deals 20d knockback when struck. In the first interpretation, the aura cancels the attack and strikes the attacker with a 5d+2 crushing attack (capped by the maximum ST of the baseball bat). In the second interpretation, the new attack would be a 5d+2 crushing attack, which would occur randomly against a target away from the original (it might be the attacker, a bystander, or something else).

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Aldric

you want to deflect bullets? Buy a penalty to attacks against you, or DR.

DR and Obscure don't work the way knockback does, though.

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

For example, an opponent hits the character with the aura active with an aluminum baseball bat. The baseball bat is not destroyed by the aura's attack, but we can either assume that its momentum is reduced by the aura or, after it imparts its momentum to the character, it receives new momentum from the character's aura.

The aura hits the bat before the bat hits your character if it's an "Area Effect" Aura, otherwise it hits it after.

When someone hits an aura, it would make sense to apply the aura attack directly to whatever body part hit it (ie a punch burns your hand, a kick burns your foot, a knee burns your leg, an elbow burns your arm, a baseball swing burns your bat) but in the case of AE, B413 says to use B400's Large Area Injury rules unless "only a single body part is contained within the area"

Perhaps carrying something or someone makes them a hit location on you and so your torso absorbs damage that might otherwise hit them? Weapons thrown or shot into an AE while the user remains behind clearly are the "single body part" criteria in that case, and would take it all.

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

So, a ST 10 character would deal 1d+2 crushing damage with the aluminum baseball bat. The aura effectively deals 20d knockback when struck. In the first interpretation, the aura cancels the attack and strikes the attacker with a 5d+2 crushing attack (capped by the maximum ST of the baseball bat). In the second interpretation, the new attack would be a 5d+2 crushing attack, which would occur randomly against a target away from the original (it might be the attacker, a bystander, or something else).

That's not how knockback would work. 32 ounce Baseball bats have a weight of 2, B558 says that Homogenous objects of that weight have 10 HP, so what would happen is you would roll the damage, divide it by 8 (10-2) and round down, and that's how many yards it would go flying back after the aura activates.

For the standard melee aura, this would happen after it hits you. For an AE aura, it would happen as soon as the bat entered the radius. This is only if it was thrown though...

If the bat is wielded by someone with HP or ST higher than the bat (such as someone with ST 11, or ST 8 with Very Fat) then I believe you would use them to resist the knockback instead?

The only way I could see the damage something did to you mattering is if you designed DR with Reflexive. If you buy a Crushing Attack then you do that damage to determine knockback regardless of how hard someone hits you.