Enhancement of the Sun?

[Refplace]

All good points but I charge +50% for it.
I used the utility cosmic same as "Essential" on Create and give sunlight powers more clout in a variety of ways.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

If it's exploiting an existing Weakness or Vulnerability then it's a +0% enhancement.

I unequally agree. Such "Counts as" are Features.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

If it does double damage to a specific type of target without exploiting the target's own traits then it's Accessibility: Half Power against everything except X.

Here rather you you buy the Innate attack but with split levels, where the first half doesn't have the Accessibility the other half does have the Accessbility "Only against X". you can Stack leveled advantages with different enhancements and limitation and it can still be consider 'one' attack

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

I unequally agree. Such "Counts as" are Features.

Unequal agreement?

Here rather you you buy the Innate attack but with split levels, where the first half doesn't have the Accessibility the other half does have the Accessbility "Only against X". you can Stack leveled advantages with different enhancements and limitation and it can still be consider 'one' attack

You can do it this way, but why? "Half power against everything but x" is the same as "Double power against x". It's going to be generally simpler and cheaper than the stacked levels way.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by supersaiyandoyle

I'm creating an innate attack for a paladin of light, and I wanted it to be considered damage from the sun in terms of weakness to sunlight. How would I go about doing this?

I'd go with a perk here for one particular attack or group of attacks - or a 5-point version of Blessed if all your attacks count as sunlight...which is kind of awesome now that I think about it.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

I'd go with a perk here for one particular attack or group of attacks - or a 5-point version of Blessed if all your attacks count as sunlight...which is kind of awesome now that I think about it.

If the priest of Nirgal doesn't need any special traits to make his burning attacks fire, why does the priest of Shamash need special traits to make his sunlight?

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Unequal agreement?

It was meant to be Unequivocally ruddy spell checker 8(.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

You can do it this way, but why? "Half power against everything but x" is the same as "Double power against x". It's going to be generally simpler and cheaper than the stacked levels way.

Because it how the rules works. You are making the General Attack portion of it more inexpressive and getting a more of a discount on the narrow class.

Lets take an Innate attack that works out at 5/level. and for a total of 10 levels of it.

Now lets grab the canonical "Only on Sea Creature, - 30%" (B110)

So the first half , the 5d that effects everyone costs [25] but the double table portion cost [18] more. for a total cost of [43]

Now your wat "Accessible Half damage against non-sea creatures" First you have to Figure out what to bench mark it at because if also -30%. apllied to the full 50 point attack it ends up costing [35]
So you paining only only [17-18] points for the everyone ability, will still only paying the same for only hurt sea creature part.
or you can argue you still paying the full [25] for the general ablity and but get a massive discount of only [10] for the special part.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

Because it how the rules works. You are making the General Attack portion of it more inexpressive and getting a more of a discount on the narrow class.

The rules work either way, except that the ABC rule says to do it the cheapest way. Which is with a half power accessibility.

Now your wat "Accessible Half damage against non-sea creatures" First you have to Figure out what to bench mark it at because if also -30%. apllied to the full 50 point attack it ends up costing [35]

"Not against anyone other than sea creatures" is the same as "Only on Sea Creatures" and is -30%, half that is -15%. So your 10 level attack is [43] points. Which is cheaper than [48].

[Ejidoth]

Generally I find that the utility of an attack a particular enemy is weak against is paid for in many ways simply by requiring the character to build the attack thematically rather than optimally.

For instance, if you expect to fight enemies that are weak to electricity, I wouldn't charge you extra for a lightning bolt attack, but you couldn't just buy up a high damage burning attack and call it lightning, I'd require you to include the Surge modifier, and probably full Arcing Surge so it matches Magic lightning bolts properly.

Similarly, building an innate attack for a Paladin of Light, I'd probably require it to be built as a cone or emanation or something rather than a projectile, and maybe have the player build in a dazzling or blinding effect of some sort. That weakens it as an attack a little, and it's maybe not perfect for what he plans to use it for (e.g. slaying vampires) but as long as the attack's built that way I don't see a problem with calling it sunlight, not charging him a UB for it or anything, and letting it work perfectly well against the vampire weakness.

EDIT: Corollary to that, I would at least consider charging extra if he wanted to buy, say, a ranged cutting attack that 'counts as sunlight' despite not acting in any way like sunlight.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

If the priest of Nirgal doesn't need any special traits to make his burning attacks fire, why does the priest of Shamash need special traits to make his sunlight?

Because burning attacks are meant to represent fire, lasers, etc.? What exactly kind of damage is sunlight? I suppose you could say it's a laser if concentrated enough. That said, you've got a valid point, but I'd limit it. If the attack only does "sunlight damage" then yeah, that seems like a feature. But if it's a burning attack that also inflict that sort of follow-up effect then I'd make it a perk. It's the same reason I'd require a perk for someone taking a Impaling attack that shoots "silver daggers" at a target. You can't get a silver follow-up normally. But you know what, SP? There should be a way. Perhaps a enhancement that allows you to add a positive version of a Nuisance Effect - a "Convenience Effect" if you will. I thought about this a lot in the past and this is yet another example of which such a enhancement might be needed. Were I to wrote up such a modifier (and I might), I would price it at +10% a level and figure up some guidelines. For example, "Convenience Effect, Silver Follow-up" might be about +10% and "Convenience Effect, Sunlight Follow-up" might be about +20% (ish). Yes. I rather like that. Hmmm. Hmmm, I say.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

Perhaps a enhancement that allows you to add a positive version of a Nuisance Effect - a "Convenience Effect" if you will. I thought about this a lot in the past and this is yet another example of which such a enhancement might be needed. Were I to wrote up such a modifier (and I might), I would price it at +10% a level and figure up some guidelines. For example, "Convenience Effect, Silver Follow-up" might be about +10% and "Convenience Effect, Sunlight Follow-up" might be about +20% (ish). Yes. I rather like that. Hmmm. Hmmm, I say.

Not a bad approach. The tricky part being where you set the divider between special effect and worth a modifier, which is of course exactly the same problem as deciding when a potential drawback crosses from special effect to nuisance effect or accessibility limitation.