1 Affliction or two Afflictions with Link?

[roland]

A creature from my game campaign can degenerate opponents with its psychic powers. For example it can simultaneously give them the "Bloodlust" disadvantage and the "Bestial" disadvantage. Is it necessary for the creature to acquire two Afflictions linked together with "Link" or can it have only one Affliction with two modifiers?

Thanks

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by roland

A creature from my game campaign can degenerate opponents with its psychic powers. For example it can simultaneously give them the "Bloodlust" disadvantage and the "Bestial" disadvantage. Is it necessary for the creature to acquire two Afflictions linked together with "Link" or can it have only one Affliction with two modifiers?

Thanks

Yes, either method works. Affliction can impart multiple conditions or effects.
Add Selective Effect and you can make it use some or all of the enhancements, giving it ,ore versatility.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by roland

A creature from my game campaign can degenerate opponents with its psychic powers. For example it can simultaneously give them the "Bloodlust" disadvantage and the "Bestial" disadvantage. Is it necessary for the creature to acquire two Afflictions linked together with "Link" or can it have only one Affliction with two modifiers?

Thanks

There's basically three ways to build this as an Affliction. You can have Affliction (Disadvantage: Bloodlust +10%; Disadvantage: Bestial +10%) [12], in which case the target gets a single roll to resist and, upon failure, gains both Disadvantages for minutes equal to their Margin of Failure (as noted, you can toss on Selectivity +10%, boosting price to [13], to be able to Afflict only Bloodlust or Bestial, rather than always having to Afflict both). You can have Affliction (Disadvantage: Bloodlust +10%; Link +10%) [12] + Affliction (Disadvantage: Bestial +10%; Link +10%) [12], total [24], in which case the character gets separate rolls against each of Bloodlust and Bestial, again suffering from any trait the character fails to resist for minutes equal to MoF. You could upgrade one or both Links to +20% (for [+1] to cost for each Affliction you do this for) to allow them to be used independently. Finally, you could assign one of the Disadvantages as a secondary effect - this makes it cost 1/5th as much, but also means the target has to fail by 5 for it to come into play (presumably for as long as the primary effect) - for example, this could be Affliction (Disadvantage: Bloodlust +10%; Disadvantage: Bestial, Secondary Effect, +2%) [11.2], which rounds up to [12].

Note for the build with Link you are massively overpaying for what is a very minor improvement. It may be more appropriate to have a "Separate Rolls" Enhancement for Affliction, making it so that each of the effects involved calls for a separate roll to resist; I'd eyeball it at around +10%.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Note for the build with Link you are massively overpaying for what is a very minor improvement. It may be more appropriate to have a "Separate Rolls" Enhancement for Affliction, making it so that each of the effects involved calls for a separate roll to resist; I'd eyeball it at around +10%.

Aside from the # of rolls issue, I could see one other difference being that Power Parries have to counter the two halves separately: you're countering two levels of Affliction instead of one level.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Plane

Aside from the # of rolls issue, I could see one other difference being that Power Parries have to counter the two halves separately: you're countering two levels of Affliction instead of one level.

I'm honestly not certain if two Linked attacks are meant to be defended against separately or together. For that matter, I'm not certain if such would have the character make one attack roll, or two. Most suggested builds for Linked Innate Attacks (typically because the designer wants two damage types in play at once - an ice attack might be both crushing and fatigue, with the latter having the Freezing Hazard, for example) seem to assume it's just one attack, and thus would call for a single attack roll and a single defense roll.