12-07-2018, 02:30 PM | #71 | |||||||||||||||||
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: Defensive Auras
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You can already "Wait .. throw a Knee Attack into whatever hand they try to Hammer Fist me with", if you want. The penalties for trying to Knee Attack an incoming bullet would be pretty extraordinary, do you want me to calculate them? I don't want to delve too much into Wait mechanics, because clearly Area Effect attacks which hit anything crossing into them (via Aura or Persistant) are a lot more inclusive than a sentient choice of Wait criteria. Wait is only being used as an example of interrupting turns. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Okay, so 14 damage then. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Prior to the target entering though, the binding specific to them (like a vine) doesn't actually exist to target though, so I don't know if it would be right to be able to target it for attack prior to it's spontaneous creation to deal with an intruder. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||
12-07-2018, 03:51 PM | #72 | ||||||||||||||||
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: Defensive Auras
If we are cherry picking "nobody [else] is safe!", but the first sentence is more critical "manifest itself in undesirable and inappropriate times". Uncontrollable is a limitation because your power isn't predictable or under your control.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Rule of thumb: a side effect is a descriptive manifestation which might benefit you sometimes under the right condition, but really isn't important/powerful enough to be its own trait. "I fire lava, and leaves minimal quantities of worthless chunks of rock" is meh and perhaps you'll need some lava rock someday. "I fire molten gold, which cools into gold that I can sell to make a side fortune" isn't covered unless you buy other advantages. Flame area aura is actually more expensive than cr knock back area aura, so it should provide less benefit, yet you're essentially arguing the lesser aura can provide features that the more expensive aura would not. |
||||||||||||||||
12-07-2018, 11:00 PM | #73 | |||||||||||||||
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: Defensive Auras
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
if you plasma-roast a bullet into a fine lead mist, it's going to lose some of its penetrating power. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
A "shattered" sword could still hit someone with the fragments, but clearly if you were throwing it as an "impaling" attack, it would no longer be that, and instead be a series of smaller cutting attacks, as fragmentation tends to be. So GM intervention would make sense if still applying damage as a result of destroyed object fragments hitting someone. Quote:
I don't think "Reduced Duration" had been published at the time of GURPS Powers so my guess is Kromm had intended for the immediate cessation of Klutziness as soon as someone left the area, it may have been worked into the pricing of "Environmental, Touching ground within area". Since it says "Those who leave the area are free of the Affliction, but must make a new resistance roll if they return" though, it sounds like "free of" is referring to the persistent need to make a DX roll every second, not the MoS minutes of being klutzy if you had failed your resistance roll during your time on the ice. I don't have a problem with the build/description, I know if I get thrown off balance on ice, I can be shook up about it for some time after and don't immediately get my coordination back the second I step off. Maybe not for a full minute, which might be why Kromm added RD in the Powers errata. Quote:
Quote:
P42 on Binding: "if the persistent effect forms a vision-impeding barrier (like dense spider webs), stack Wall (+30% or +60%) on top of that." "Impeding" may not mean "totally stopping" (opaque) so I agree this may merely mean translucent. I'm not sure exactly how translucent, but at bare minimum I think we should agree that looking through a "Wall" should at least incur -1 to perception rolls like a single level of obscure. If it doesn't incur some kind of penalty then it isn't really impeding vision. You'd probably need "No Signature" on your Wall for invisible walls that don't create vision penalties. Quote:
If I threw down "Affliction: Warp, Area Effect, Persistant" in the middle of a hallway so that anything traveled down that hallway gets teleported into a nearby volcano, are you thinking bullets fired down that hallway somehow would not be teleported until after they went across that field and shot what was on the other side? This is a more general argument for you to have about the pricing comparison between Burning Attack and Crushing Attack. The former does risk infernos that consume your valuable salvage loot, but it also allows you to set infernos that will continue to consume enemy fortresses when you're long gone, so that probably balances out. |
|||||||||||||||
12-08-2018, 07:22 AM | #74 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Defensive Auras
I generally take No Incendiary Effect (-10%) or tight beam if I have a character using a burning attack (unless the character is meant to have disastrous powers). Otherwise, bad things happen when you start using 10d+ attacks.
|
12-09-2018, 11:23 AM | #75 |
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: Defensive Auras
I'm wondering if all flame attacks should extra-flammable. "No incendiary" covers stuff like frostbite, so basic Burning could cover stuff that could eventually cause fires like lightning/electricity so shooting actual flames should probably be extra-incendiary.
|
12-11-2018, 10:26 AM | #76 | ||||||||||||||
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: Defensive Auras
You're missing the first part - it doesn't go after anyone until you lose control of the power.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Game design is: you describe the game effects, then buy the traits that give you those game effects. You don't buy traits and use them to other "free" traits. GMs are around to reject things like that. Trying to apply pieces of rules that would normally apply maneuvers, PCs, or items individually, in a fairly haphazardly, like they were all the same thing, while ignoring context isn't the solution. Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by naloth; 12-11-2018 at 10:30 AM. |
||||||||||||||
12-11-2018, 12:06 PM | #77 | |||||||||||||
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: Defensive Auras
That was AH's context.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Wouldn't that be different than the piercing attack it originally took the form of? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Due to problems like DR being reduced by Corrosive Attack and it "healing", I don't know that you could design a DR that functions like Power Parry does, which seems like a closer match for how knockback v kinetic attacks would work. Acid has mass and a blob of acid could probably be knocked back by kinetic impact, yet conceptually it would be strange for the acid to compromise the outward force in the process. "double duty for your points" is part of what "Using Abilities at Default" covers, so if you don't like the approach of using Power Parry as a basis, this could be another way. This would require some modification outside the usual guidelines though, since you normally spend FP and a Ready maneuver to get temporary DR this way, and those shouldn't be requirements for an Aura's automatic mitigation of incoming bodies. Instead it should be used to generate a success roll to see if your ability competently reacts to an incoming attack. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"My attack is a physical object that can be displaced by kinetic forces" is an inherent aspect of firing kinetic rounds, throwing physical objects like grenades or knives, or shooting arrows from bows or bolts from crossbows. The main question is whether that is purely covered by "Limited Use: Reload", by "Gadget", some combination of the two, or some undefined 0% modifier. If that is a default aspect of kinetic Innate Attacks then you could design some kind of enhancement to make "my attack isn't an object" attacks. Even stuff like a ball of compressed air (Concussion, Powers 137) would have mass from the gas molecules. There's probably some logical grounds in thinking that anything capable of doing knockback can itself be knocked back without Cosmic exceptions. If you don't want to deal with the humbuggery of using Knockback rules against the weight of objections, subbing in Power Parry to deal with the force of objects is a simpler house rule. Already-active Area Effects (you made an attack and it is Persistant, or you already turned on your Aura) which are Bombardment should need to roll for a Power Parry based on Bombardment skill, those without it should count as an automatic hit and subtract the damage. Quote:
Trying to apply pieces of rules that would normally apply maneuvers, PCs, or items individually, in a fairly haphazardly, like they were all the same thing, while ignoring context isn't the solution. Quote:
Quote:
If a grenade lands next to a character and they don't have time to grab it and throw it, they should be able to Shove it away and still create some space using Knockback. This could create the result of them taking less damage, but isn't like getting free DR. Ignoring enhancements like Area Effect or Aura, you need to first understand that it's possible to shoot down incoming things using Wait > Attack, or that you can "Innate Attack" without a Wait using a Power Parry... If you've prepped with Persistent Area Effect, your Area gets an automatic attack against stuff that enters it... If you've prepped by turning on an Area Effect Aura, your Area gets an automatic attack against stuff that enters it... Rolls to hit are not needed for AE against stuff in the AE this unless you took Bombardment. If that's too powerful I guess you could both house-rule that 1) non-Bombardment AE should need to roll against skill 16, not automatic hits (or allow that as some kind of -1% limitation) 2) Speed/Range Modifiers also apply to these effective skills instead of just Size Modifiers (opt to discount "not for range or any other factor") consider it a form of exposure time (or make that an added limitation) |
|||||||||||||
12-11-2018, 02:48 PM | #78 | ||||||||||||||
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: Defensive Auras
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You don't see the insanity of trying to pull very different mechanics and random bits of rules that apply to different things and different situations? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Personally, I'd avoid that and stick with what abilities actually do rather than venturing into "what ifs" that require and give things never intended to be part of the power. |
||||||||||||||
12-11-2018, 09:05 PM | #79 | ||||||||||
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: Defensive Auras
Quote:
"Aura" doesn't specify protection because alone it wouldn't give any, we only recently learned you could combine it with Area Effect and in that case the example was with Afflictions so we can't expect a disclaimer for how AE Aura Innate Attack works when we don't have an example of it yet. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Aura/Area Effect just controls the timing and cost of doing so. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No, sorry I should have written Affliction: Warp there, not Warp. More of a Power Parry, since each level of Affliction negates one die of damage. If you had Affliction (Advantage: Warp, Melee, Aura, Area Effect) any bullets entering your area would be immediately teleported away... If "immediate" is too powerful an interpretation of how Aura works to interrupt turns you can house rule using Power Parry reductions instead. Perhaps a low-level affliction has only managed to teleport 1/2 to 1/3 of the bullet away by the time it crosses the AE, for example. Quote:
This is why "Bombardment" helps to deal with the problem because small stuff wouldn't be hit very often, and another reason you could house-rule that non-limited works like Bombardment skill 16. A cheap enhancement or a limitation would solve the air molecule / raindrop / snowflake dilemma, no need for external abilities. |
||||||||||
12-12-2018, 02:34 PM | #80 | ||||||
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: Defensive Auras
Ok, so your whole argument is that Area provides DR or some other rules defined defensive value. Simply quote that from the rules, with the quantity of protection Area provides in terms of DR, bonus HP, penalties to shoot, or whatever.
How so? Rigid is a barrier, it doesn't "obscure" or "afflict", as it blocks vision by being a material barrier. You could enhance it to make it less noticeable (No/Low Signature) but otherwise you get a physical, solid wall with a fix DR/HP. 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. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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? The rules may seem to cause 'game world' inconsistencies, but that's only if you don't buy a combination of traits that meets your expectations. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
Tags |
aura of power, persistent |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|