Reverse Missiles as a standalone power... how would you model it?

[dgswensen]

I'm thinking about getting away from Magic and just modeling various spells as advantages instead, but Reverse Missiles, a rather common defensive spell in my campaign, is a tricky one for me. Any input?

Sorry if this has been covered before, or elsewhere.

[Bruno]

I'd think about DR with Reflective and a limitation "Only vs Missiles", which is probably only worth -20%, considering how broad the definition of "Missiles" is for that spell.

Yes, this means it's not absolute, unlike the spell, but that's one of the significant differences between the Powers system and the Magic system.

[RobKamm]

I'm not thinking of what it might be, but a limitation that might be "nice" for this would be one that made it all-or-nothing. If the missile inflicts up to the DR's capacity it is reflected. Otherwise it goes through normally. This would be a good way to not have to explain why and how an arrow hurt both the Reverse Missile protected character and the archer. It would also make the spell more customizable. At first the mage might only be able to reflect some thrown objects and maybe some long-ranged arrows, but as their "skill" improves they could begin turning more arrows and eventually heavier artillery.

[vicky_molokh]

Affliction with
Aura, Area Effect, Accessibility (ranged attacks only), Advantage: Warp (only turns the target around).

Be sure to take lots of levels to prevent the missile from making its HT roll. Alternatively, make it a Based on DX or IQ or Will, for inanimate objects have IQ/DX/Will/Per of 0.

[naloth]

Control (Kinetic Energy, Common?) with at least 20 levels... Set up a "reflector" wall and all kinetic energy can be reversed in orientation as it passes through. ~ 200 points (Only Missiles -20%, Only to set orientation to away -10%, 4 Fatigue/Min of Use -20%) unless you get creative on limitations.

Edit: Upon reflection (no pun intended), it seem that rather taking "only missiles" as a limitation it would be better to alter the category from Common to an Occasional. This makes it 15/lvl instead (which comes out to almost the same point value, but allows more in limitations).

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by RobKamm

I'm not thinking of what it might be, but a limitation that might be "nice" for this would be one that made it all-or-nothing. If the missile inflicts up to the DR's capacity it is reflected. Otherwise it goes through normally.

You mean a limitation on the Reflection enhancement, yes? Makes sense to me, although a general limitation of that kind could be quite useful for DR - for some kinds of force-field.

I'm sort of amblivient on what to price it - with only DR 1, that's a huge limitation, but with DR 50 there's not much that can go through it... I suppose if you get hit with something that can do 51 damage, instead of being almost immune you explode in a pink mist.

It's like the usual DR-vs-high-damage-weapons problem, only much much worse.

[RobKamm]

Well, I was thinking about putting the limitation on the DR rather than just the Reflection modifier. But you're right that could cause some dramatically binary effects. Either way.

[Brandy]

Originally Posted by Bruno

I'd think about DR with Reflective and a limitation "Only vs Missiles", which is probably only worth -20%, considering how broad the definition of "Missiles" is for that spell.

FWIW, I agree that this is *the* way to build this power. I'd give -40% for "Only vs. Missiles", however. It is very broad, but it is clearly a subset of "Ranged Attacks", which is -20%.

As for the all-or-nothing limitation (on either the reflection or the DR itself), I would price it as an accessibility. I wouldn't use a fixed value for this -- the effectiveness of all-or-nothing DR is dependent upon the usual damage amounts found in the campaign and the amount of DR you purchase.

In effect, the accessibility is not "Only versus attacks that don't exceed DR" (which IMO is impossible to put a fair price on) but rather, "Only versus attacks doing X damage or less" where X is coincidentally equal to the amount of DR you have.

Something like this:
DR 20 (Limited: vs. Missiles, -40%; Reflective, +100%; Accessibility, Only versus attacks doing 20 damage or less, -5%) [155] or [110] w/Multiplicative Modifiers

DR 10 (Limited: vs. Missiles, -40%; Reflective, +100%; Accessibility, Only versus attacks doing 10 damage or less, -15%) [73] or [45] w/Multiplicative Modifiers

[vicky_molokh]

If 'Cannot Wear Armor' doesn't change its percentile value regardless of the amount of wearable armor available (and the maximum DR you can have, because your DR is all you've got now), why should 'All or nothing' change its percentile value depending on the amount of DR it comes with?

[Brandy]

Originally Posted by Molokh

If 'Cannot Wear Armor' doesn't change its percentile value regardless of the amount of wearable armor available (and the maximum DR you can have, because your DR is all you've got now), why should 'All or nothing' change its percentile value depending on the amount of DR it comes with?

I'm not seeing what one has to do with another, Molokh.

Cannot wear Armor says: "I'll forego the protection I can get as gear."

All-or-Nothing says: "This power is only effective versus the x% of attacks that do the least amount of damage."

I really don't see any common ground there at all.