Is TK better than Super-ST

[AlexanderHowl]

I was wondering if people thought that TK was better than Super-ST? For 400 CP, a super could have TK 100 (requires concentration, range 10 yards, no FP cost) or Super-ST 10 (no concentration, range C, 1 FP per attack). Since Super-TK requires Super-Effort (+400%) and Super-Damage (+900%), it would cost around 560 CP to have Super-TK 10 (which is less effective than TK 100 unless you add other enhancements).

I think that TK 100 is slightly inferior to Super-ST 10, though it does benefit from some advantages. What do you think? Would you rather give a super TK 100 or Super-ST 10?

[smurf]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I was wondering if people thought that TK was better than Super-ST? For 400 CP, a super could have TK 100 (requires concentration, range 10 yards, no FP cost) or Super-ST 10 (no concentration, range C, 1 FP per attack). Since Super-TK requires Super-Effort (+400%) and Super-Damage (+900%), it would cost around 560 CP to have Super-TK 10 (which is less effective than TK 100 unless you add other enhancements).

I think that TK 100 is slightly inferior to Super-ST 10, though it does benefit from some advantages. What do you think? Would you rather give a super TK 100 or Super-ST 10?

TK 100 (O_o) apart from costing 500pts flat +/- any mods, the only other benefit is the character can fly (100x100/5 = 2000lb BL), or rather the character and close to a ton can fly at 100move (approx 200mph).

Would Super ST be able to do Jumping distances based on ST?

[AlexanderHowl]

Sorry, you are right about the cost, and you would need TK 120 to actually be equivalent. A character could take TK 120 (Reduced Range /10, -30%) [420] to get most of the benefits of ST 20 [100] plus Super-ST 10 [400]. You could need to purchase HP 20 [40] to get the same resistance to damage, slam, etc, but you could justify that as an internal TK structural field. The main differences becomes the ability to use extra effort with TK 120 and the ability to apply ST without Concentrating with ST 20 plus Super-ST 10.

You make a good point about flight though, as the character with TK 120 could fly at 240 mph as long as they concentrated. In fact, with TK 120, you could move a small car (2880 lbs; a 1993 5-door Geo Metro with four people and luggage) at 240 mph without difficulty (around three times as fast as the car could have actually gone with that much weight). Of course, someone is going to wonder about a flying Geo Metro, but that is what the rest of the team is for.

[smurf]

Work out the impact damage, it could wipe out the entire team if the Psi forgets their abilities. Although it would look very Harry Potter in a flying car.

[Kax]

make the TK Reflexive, no concentration required

[AlexanderHowl]

Hm, TK 120 (Reduced Range /10, -30%; Reflexive, +40%) [660] would be 160 points more the ST 20 plus Super-ST 10. In that case, I think that ST 20 plus Super-ST 10 is better, as the TK super would need to spend 40 CP to get HP+20 while the ST super would only have to spend 100 CP to get Flight and Enhanced Move 3 (Air). With a difference of 100 CP, the ST super can purchase more than enough traits to give him or her a clear advantage.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by Kax

make the TK Reflexive, no concentration required

Just add one level of Reduced Time at +20% rather than +40% for Reflexive. Reflexive isn't required to remove a concentration requirement. The only benefit it has for an active ability like TK is simply to act as one level of Reduced Time -- and one level of Reduced Time alone applied to any 1-second-activation ability makes it a free action.

The only reason to pay the extra for Reflexive would be for automatic activation, if you can convince your GM that TK is somehow used as a defense or a sense.

Originally Posted by Powers 109

Reflexive is for defenses that take a second to activate, senses that require a second of concentration (e.g., Detect), and anything the GM feels serves a purpose similar to either.

Most defenses that are "done with TK" according to the fluff text (say, catching bullets or incoming weapons and blows) are better built as actual defenses with different base abilities (DR, Enhanced Dodge, etc) and perhaps made an AA with the "I can lift you with my mind" ability of Telekinesis. A remote sense of TK is getting a little weird, but if you want to remotely feel things that your invisible hands touch, then you'd probably start with Clairsentience (Touch).

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Just add one level of Reduced Time at +20% rather than +40% for Reflexive. Reflexive isn't required to remove a concentration requirement. The only benefit it has for an active ability like TK is simply to act as one level of Reduced Time -- and one level of Reduced Time alone applied to any 1-second-activation ability makes it a free action.

Does TK count as an 'attack power'? If so, you can't apply Reduced Time to it.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Does TK count as an 'attack power'?

A good question. I don't know of a formal definition of "attack power" in Basic. Context usually makes it Affliction, Binding, and Innate Attack; see references below. But of course that repeated enumeration may not be exhaustive.

The glossary in Powers gives a straight-up definition:

Originally Posted by Power 235

attack ability: Any ability that can injure an opponent or compromise his capabilities – most often Affliction, Binding, Innate Attack, Leech, or Neutralize. Often shortened to “attack.”

which adds Leech and Neutralize to the core three often mentioned in this context, but still omitting TK. But of course TK can injure an opponent or compromise his capabilities.

As always, it's a GM call, but I personally wouldn't get bent out of shape if a GM ruled that TK was an attack abiilty.

More references below, for the sake of pedantry and future forum searches.

Extra Attack has in its description:

Originally Posted by B53

You may not have more attacks than you have limbs (arms, legs, etc.), natural weapons (Strikers, Teeth, etc.), and attack powers (Afflictions, Bindings, and Innate Attacks) with which to attack.

which looks like a definition via enumeration, but that's of course not really the goal of this sentence. Slightly more authoritative is the same list repeated in the description of Attack Modifiers

Originally Posted by B102

Some enhancements and limitations are intended only for Affliction, Binding, and Innate Attack, and for advantages modified with the Ranged enhancement (p. 107). They are called “attack” modifiers.

You might well think that "attacks" are those abilities to which you can apply attack modifiers. The text for Blockable once again recites this trio, again in passing rather than trying to define the phrase, but adds a pretty big extension:

Originally Posted by Powers 110

Ranged attack abilities (Affliction, Binding, Innate Attack, advantages with the Ranged enhancement, etc.) normally work like firearms when it comes to the target’s legal active defenses: the victim can only dodge.

TK wouldn't literally have a Ranged Enhancement because that's built in, but it's ranged, and then there's the "etc". OTOH, Powers 174 cites a couple of ranged abilities as "non-attack abilities", so just being ranged doesn't make something an attack (as the reasonable gamer might expect) despite this text, which just goes to show the danger of trying to be too literal.

The Power Parry rules like our usual trio while listing the possibilities:

Originally Posted by Powers 168

Power Parry is meant for Innate Attacks, but the GM can let Afflictions parry other Afflictions and Bindings parry other Bindings.

If we go back to Basic for basics, then in the earliest part of the section on "Attacking", we get

Originally Posted by B326

You attempt to hit a foe or other target by executing an Attack, All-Out Attack, or Move and Attack maneuver.

So you could take a position that an "attack" is anything that you do using one of the Attack Maneuvers. The description of TK includes examples of using Attack Maneuvers to grab a gun or shoot a gun that you're TK-holding.

The text doesn't actually mention a maneuver when it talks about direct TK strikes. If we want to get really picky, the description of TK says the character is taking a Concentrate Maneuver, then goes on to say "your TK may then perform one standard Maneuver as if it were a disembodied pair of hands". The good rules-lawyer will argue that this means the character isn't "attacking" by the Basic Maneuver definition, but the TK is, as if those disembodied hands were an actual other character in play that get a Maneuver only when their controlling player Concentrates.

[AlexanderHowl]

Reduced Time does not negate the need for concentration though, it just reduces the time to activate (TK already activates instantly as soon as you concentrate). TK does not function by having a turn of concentration and then act with TK next turn. Instead, TK functions by concentrating and acting with TK within the same turn (Characters, p. 92).