Afflicting a Trait Non-Cumulatively

[JCurwen3]

I'm unsure about what happens when you try to use an Affliction that gives an Advantage without the Cumulative enhancement to someone who already has that advantage.

First, let's start with the case of beneficial afflictions.

If the advantage isn't levelled Cumulative wouldn't help anyway, and if it's exactly the same advantage, same modifiers and all, without Cumulative it wouldn't affect you because the levels won't add to your own if it was levelled.

But what about the case of an advantage with different modifiers? Let's say you have ATR 1, unmodified. Then an ally wants to use their (non-Cumulative) Affliction with Malediction (so you can waive resistance) that gives someone ATR 1 with the enhancement Super-Speed (from p. P42) on you, to help give you a boost in speed for the duration. What happens? Assuming you don't resist, and the ally has a success, do you function as just plain old ATR 1 (your base power), or do you function as ATR 1 with Super-Speed for the duration? And what if he misunderstands or unintentionally misrepresents his "speed boost" power to you, and, in fact, it gives someone ATR 1 with the limitation Non-Combat Speed (same page)? It "works" on you, and then for the duration, do you function as though you had unmodified ATR 1, or as though you had ATR 1 but only out-of-combat (no additional maneuvers)?

Now let's talk the more common malicious Afflictions.

If you have Warp, and someone Afflicts Warp on you (to teleport you away), do your power and the afflicted power interact? Namely, would it even work at all? Or would it take away your power to control your own Warp for the duration (instead your teleportation is controlled by Teleport Jerk, the Afflicter)? Or would it give you more defense or resistance against the Affliction? Or is it like you have two Warps for the duration, one controlled by the afflicter, one controlled by you, so you could teleport back only to be teleported away again for the duration? Or what?

Warp has an immediate in-game effect (to change your location) so it might not be the perfect example. I'll pick an advantage with a clearly defined purpose and an effect which is intrinsic to possessing it: Unaging. Let's say you have unmodified Unaging. One of your own kind has an Affliction that doesn't negate Unaging, but that Afflicts Unaging with the Life Extension limitation (Psionic Powers, p. 18) for Extended Duration: Permanent, which normally forces you to have to roll each year to see if you age or you don't. Of course you attempt to resist, but Inevitable-Death-Man wins the day and his Affliction "works" on you. What's your status now? Do you have your unmodified Unaging? Or do you have this weaker version for the (permanent unless you figure out a way around it) duration? Or will the fact that you already had Unaging give you some extra (or additional) resistance to the effect of the Affliction?

I could pick other advantages with different modifier-combos to try to illustrate my rules confusion on this point, but I think the above examples suffice. I chose them as examples because they seemed expedient, but basically I'm more interested in the general way this should be handled regardless of the Afflicted trait, rather than those examples specifically (unless, of course, they represent special exceptions to the rules for some reason). Thanks in advance!

[David Johnston2]

I could pick other advantages with different modifier-combos to try to illustrate my rules confusion on this point, but I think the above examples suffice. I chose them as examples because they seemed expedient, but basically I'm more interested in the general way this should be handled regardless of the Afflicted trait, rather than those examples specifically (unless, of course, they represent special exceptions to the rules for some reason). Thanks in advance!

I would say that Afflicting someone who already has a leveled advantage with a level of the advantage gives them another level of the advantage. Not being cumulative only keeps you from using the Affliction repeatedly. Afflicting someone with things like Warp or Alternate Form lets them fight back if they have an advantage that could reasonably counteract what the Afflictor is trying to do. It's a judgement call whether that situation applies.

[Langy]

If the advantage isn't levelled Cumulative wouldn't help anyway, and if it's exactly the same advantage, same modifiers and all, without Cumulative it wouldn't affect you because the levels won't add to your own if it was levelled.

This is not the case. If it were, then you'd be required to have Cumulative if you afflicted someone with extra ST, DX, HT, etc, since all of these are leveled 'advantages'.

In other words, completely agree with David Johnston here.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by Langy

This is not the case. If it were, then you'd be required to have Cumulative if you afflicted someone with extra ST, DX, HT, etc, since all of these are leveled 'advantages'.

In other words, completely agree with David Johnston here.

Thanks for that Langy, DavidJohnston2. That makes sense.

So then in my first example where the character is afflicted with ATR 1 and Super-Speed, he'd behave as if he had ATR 1 + ATR 1 (Super-Speed), and in the next he'd have ATR 1 + ATR 1 (Non-Combat Speed) for the duration.

What if (I know it would be quite unusual) the Affliction was meant to be malicious, and the desired effect was to replace the much more powerful ATR 1 with ATR 1 (Non-Combat Speed)? Could an Affliction of ATR 1 (Non-Combat Speed) do that to someone with ATR 1? Or is the only way to do it with two linked Afflictions, one to Negate Advantage (ATR 1) and the other to give the limited version of ATR 1?

But that doesn't answer quite as clearly what happens when it isn't a levelled trait.

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Afflicting someone with things like Warp or Alternate Form lets them fight back if they have an advantage that could reasonably counteract what the Afflictor is trying to do. It's a judgement call whether that situation applies.

But fight back how? Is it as simple as that the guy with Warp that is being Afflicted with Warp can "fight back" by using his own power to teleport back to where he was before, essentially degenerating into a game of tug-of-war with his physical location until the duration of the Affliction expires? Or with Alternate Form, that the guy could just "change back" to fight back? Or is there more to the fighting back than that, like an additional resistance or power defense roll, or a bonus, or something?

And what about a passive power like Unaging? In that example, the character had unmodified Unaging, and then was maliciously afflicted with a more limited version that requires yearly anti-aging rolls to succeed. Are there any rules specifics (or semi-official rulings) to handle that, or is it just play it by ear and make rulings on a case-by-case basis by GM fiat? Would he be still be 100% Unaging or need to make those yearly checks?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by JCurwen3

But fight back how? Is it as simple as that the guy with Warp that is being Afflicted with Warp can "fight back" by using his own power to teleport back to where he was before, essentially degenerating into a game of tug-of-war with his physical location until the duration of the Affliction expires? Or with Alternate Form, that the guy could just "change back" to fight back? Or is there more to the fighting back than that, like an additional resistance or power defense roll, or a bonus, or something?

If you held your action so that you could interrupt the attacker's action with your own, and then did something diametrically opposed to what the attacker was trying to do, then it would be a contest of skill/attribute.

And what about a passive power like Unaging? In that example, the character had unmodified Unaging, and then was maliciously afflicted with a more limited version that requires yearly anti-aging rolls to succeed. Are there any rules specifics (or semi-official rulings) to handle that, or is it just play it by ear and make rulings on a case-by-case basis by GM fiat?

You do not get to neutralize people's advantages by Afflicting them with an alternate and lesser form of the same advantage. They do not replace, they add. So if you have Unaging and you are Afflicted with something that causes more aging rolls, then you are immune. That's what Unaging is for in the first place.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

If you held your action so that you could interrupt the attacker's action with your own, and then did something diametrically opposed to what the attacker was trying to do, then it would be a contest of skill/attribute.

That sounds reasonable, thanks.

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

You do not get to neutralize people's advantages by Afflicting them with an alternate and lesser form of the same advantage. They do not replace, they add. So if you have Unaging and you are Afflicted with something that causes more aging rolls, then you are immune. That's what Unaging is for in the first place.

That makes a lot of sense, and I agree. What about enhancing them though? Unaging (it's just an example, it could be any passive advantage) has two enhancements, one on p. B95 called Age Control (allows you to age or reverse-age at 10 times normal age rate) and one called Halt Aging on Psionic Powers p. 18 (allows you to temporarily stop the aging process in others if they're willing). Could a beneficial Affliction give someone who already had unmodified Unaging a version (for the duration) that effectively enhanced what they already had in one or both ways?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by JCurwen3

That sounds reasonable, thanks.



That makes a lot of sense, and I agree. What about enhancing them though? Unaging (it's just an example, it could be any passive advantage) has two enhancements, one on p. B95 called Age Control (allows you to age or reverse-age at 10 times normal age rate) and one called Halt Aging on Psionic Powers p. 18 (allows you to temporarily stop the aging process in others if they're willing). Could a beneficial Affliction give someone who already had unmodified Unaging a version (for the duration) that effectively enhanced what they already had in one or both ways?

For a lot of characters with Unaging the question is going to be meaningless. Modular Man has Unaging because he'll only ever succumb to the accumulation of damage from physical injuries. But an older or younger Modular Man is going to look exactly the same. Another character might be Unaging but age up a certain point but no farther and thus can be reverted to childhood by the right Affliction. No general rule applying to this question can be made. The GM has to stop looking at the characteristics and look at the character for the answer.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

For a lot of characters with Unaging the question is going to be meaningless. Modular Man has Unaging because he'll only ever succumb to the accumulation of damage from physical injuries. But an older or younger Modular Man is going to look exactly the same. Another character might be Unaging but age up a certain point but no farther and thus can be reverted to childhood by the right Affliction. No general rule applying to this question can be made. The GM has to stop looking at the characteristics and look at the character for the answer.

Granted, but just to remind you, one of the big advantages of the enhancement Age Control (arguably it's the main reason it's included) is to help Unaging characters stay on the down-low. With it, you can live a "normal life", aging at the same time as people expect you to age; you can live in the same place for 40 years, and people won't ever start to say "he hasn't aged a day - he's a monster!", and you can have normal relationships where you can "grow old together". And when it's time for you to fake your death, you can travel the world for a few years, never staying in one place too long, to rejuvenate back to being young, and start the cycle over again, perhaps returning to your old home as a relative or long lost "son" that's the spitting image of his "father". So it can be a big deal.