Rules you ignore/alter.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

T
the major problem of how modifiers are priced on Affliction and allows for beneficial afflictions to be vastly cheaper
(1pt Toxic with Malediction then allows for resistance-free granting of any advantage at 1/10th cost).

Malediction has always been a cheap workaround for consenting buffs to allies even with the Beneficial Afflictions rule of inverting the HT roll. I don't really understand why it allows waiving the HT roll. That also creates an unknown when determining margin-based effects.

It probably derives from trying to emulate spells and how you can choose not to resist a magic spell, but Afflictions already have deviated from that in always being resistible (crit success spells never) so why not also deviate in being able to waive consent?

Maybe instead it could be something like taking Controllable Disadvantage of "Susceptible to X" and insert power modifier of whatever affliction.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Otaku

The Unusual Background discussion reminded me of a few things:

• The importance of testing whether traits can be made more generic and universal, because that is part of this.
• Remembering that Unusual Background is important for covering those odd "advantages" that aren't actually traits, but where fluff becomes crunch e.g. Character has two Native Languages due to background.
• Wondering if Unusual Background needs to also be an Enhancment. You wouldn't take both the Advantage and the Enchancement for the same thing. If a trait's value varies heavily based on its commonality, would that similarly affect how valuable the Modified version should be?

While players aren't supposed to read too much into a trait's name, I also wonder there ought to be a some kind of "divisions" in Unusual Background. Maybe something based on general point value, or whether its a Mundane (but still uncommon) thing, a Supers thing, a Supernatural, thing, etc.

I use unusual background as an enhancement, indeed. Or, to be more precise, as a prerequisite ...

Let's suppose that a player character wants to have a telepathic power. If we are playing in a game world where strange powers are common (like a super world, for instance), no problem, he can buy it.

Now, if we are playing in a mundane world where PCs don't have such kind of powers (like an X-Files game), I can either forbid it or, if the player comes with an interesting justification ("my character was abducted by extraterrestrials when he was a child, and they put a strange device in his brain to experiment it), I can agree, but at a high cost: unusual background + the cost of the power.

I don't know if it is rule as written but, at least, it is how I use it. Which is quite rare, actually. In mundane game worlds, my players rarely ask for unusual advantages.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

The fix for that is making it so applying an advantage isn't a part of affliction at all. I would change it to:

Affects others (+0/+20%/+50%): any advantage may be defined as being granted to another character instead of the character who buys it. For +0%, it applies to one other character (and cannot be applied to the owner). For +20%, it can be applied to one or the other but not both. For +50%, it can apply to the owner and another character at the same time. An advantage applied to another character is normally under the control of that character; to keep it under the control of the original character buy Mind Control (Control Granted Powers Only, -80%).

I like the general premise, but not the Mind Control bit. If you're using Mind Control you might as well just make all Afflictions Maledictions.

This also doesn't help with afflicting Disadvantages or negative Attributes (weaken), which is probably why Affliction existed as a separate ability in the first place.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by naloth

I like the general premise, but not the Mind Control bit. If you're using Mind Control you might as well just make all Afflictions Maledictions.

In general Affliction (Advantage) is intended to be used for things like exoteleport, but is actually used mostly for buffs. Affliction (Exoteleport) is basically "I give you a power, and then I cause you to use it". The "cause you to use it" could be built into affliction instead, but there has to be some sort of control on that part.

Originally Posted by naloth

This also doesn't help with afflicting Disadvantages or negative Attributes (weaken), which is probably why Affliction existed as a separate ability in the first place.

For that, it doesn't matter if you can manage an affliction with a base cost of 1.

[Terranaunt]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

You can’t block bullets/beam weapons with a shield. (B327, 375) Enough examples exists in media of this being invalid. It’s as valid to block a bullet/beam with a shield as it is to dodge them—the same logic applies to both: If bullets/beams are too fast to block, they’re too fast to dodge with human reflexes. Instead of erring on the side of “you can’t do that,” we’re erring on the side of “this will be more fun.”
This really only tends to come up in Supers games, but even so, we’ve allowed the use in non-supers games.

It is one of remarkable artifacts of the system.
There is a column somewhere in Campaigns which mentioned cover, but at no point does the system recognize or suggest that your trusty shield (which modern law enforcement utilize in breaching scenarios) can be used as cover.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

In general Affliction (Advantage) is intended to be used for things like exoteleport, but is actually used mostly for buffs. Affliction (Exoteleport) is basically "I give you a power, and then I cause you to use it". The "cause you to use it" could be built into affliction instead, but there has to be some sort of control on that part.

For that, it doesn't matter if you can manage an affliction with a base cost of 1.

That hasn't been my experience. Afflictions are usually attacks of one kind or another. The best overall solution I've seen it to treat the effective level as dice of damage as a HT penalty to resist.

For buffs, Affects Others is a much better solution. I'd further refine it by adding a Ranged and Duration option.

[Rupert]

Actually, it sort of does - while you can't Block bullets with a shield in the RAW, if using the rules for damaging shield (B484) you still get the shield's DB added to your Dodge, and if that DB made the difference the shot hit the shield which acts as cover.

An easy houserule for using a shield as cover would be that attackers trying to fire past the shield take the shield's DB as a penalty. If they miss because of that penalty they hit the shield, which functions as on B484. This is probably unrealistically generous though - DB/2 or DB-1 is probably a more reasonable amount of cover bonus.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by naloth

That hasn't been my experience. Afflictions are usually attacks of one kind or another.

Afflictions in general are attacks. Afflictions with Advantage usually aren't.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Afflictions in general are attacks. Afflictions with Advantage usually aren't.

I mean that the majority of afflictions I've seen are to do things to other people that they wouldn't want happen. Beneficial afflictions are by far the minority and can mostly be replaced with Affects Others or variations thereof.

The "problems" I'd be interested in fixing with Affliction would be:
- The cost, since additional levels aren't often worth the price.
- Make the duration separate from the intensity.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by naloth

Make the duration separate from the intensity.

You can get that by taking "Fixed +0%" which turns MoF/MoV into 3, so however badly your target fails the roll doesn't affect the duration.

I think you can even swap out the 'fixed' duration (perhaps "Duration not margin-based" is better term?) for dice, like converting 3 seconds into 1d seconds. I'm sure I saw that done once or twice somewhere in Powers, though it might not have been with Affliction.