Confused by the FAQ on Afflictions

[Kelly Pedersen]

Originally Posted by naloth

Obviously there is a total miscommunication.

You implied that when you Afflict an advantage, you gain the ability to use it on the target, turning it on or off, for the duration of the affliction if you possessed the advantage.

Yes, there was a miscommunication, because that's not what I was saying at all. I agree that if an affliction is under the control of the afflictor, not the target, then the afflictor only gets to choose the inital "setting" of the advantage, and doesn't get ongoing control of it.

All of my arguments in this thread have been about how activating the afflicted advantage in the first place work - when the afflictor first puts Alternate Form/Shrinking/Flight/whatever on the target, what do they have to do. My point is simply that any activation restrictions on the advantage being afflicted must be paid by the afflictor, not the target.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

Yes, there was a miscommunication, because that's not what I was saying at all. I agree that if an affliction is under the control of the afflictor, not the target, then the afflictor only gets to choose the inital "setting" of the advantage, and doesn't get ongoing control of it.

We seem to agree with that then.

All of my arguments in this thread have been about how activating the afflicted advantage in the first place work - when the afflictor first puts Alternate Form/Shrinking/Flight/whatever on the target, what do they have to do. My point is simply that any activation restrictions on the advantage being afflicted must be paid by the afflictor, not the target.

In terms of fatigue and skill use I tend to agree. In term of maneuvers, I'm not sure it's worth singling out Shape-Shifting, especially since you have a very odd situation where the Affliction worked, but the activation turns were not spent. Besides, the enchancement Independent for a whopping 4 or 7 points (per level), makes more sense because the ability is running its course on its own anyway.

[Culture20]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Some advantages are "steady state" when turned on, but advantages like Flight enable you to do a new thing while it's active (ie not disabled by a limitation, antipower, whatever). For those powers, I strictly require Affliction to be interpreted as "blessing" the subject with the advantage - they may not be able to "turn it off", but they can control the abilities it gives them.

Unless it’s Flight burdened with an Uncontrolable and/or Always On limitation, a la The Wizard’s anti-gravity disks from FF comics.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

A classic going at least as far back as AD&D's Levitation spell. Just fly straight up for the entire duration and let it expire so that the victim plummets to their death.

But if you're in a hurry, and you control your enemy's Movement in flight, you can just powerdive into the ground or a wall -- repeatedly. Move 10 with a 10 HP human would be 1d per turn. (Maybe throw a few levels of Enhanced Move (Air) into your Flight Affliction.) Better yet, slam a different enemy to hurt them both.

I'm interested in doing a cost comparison for curiosity's sake, but I do wonder if Warp/Fly is apples to apples in terms of comparing, since the first is instant while the 2nd is ongoing. Us knowing that the person shooting Affliction can pick the Warp destination (and then the control presumably ends immediately) doesn't really set a precedent for implying they could control ongoing abilities.

Does anyone know what examples there are of ongoing advantages being manipulated by the Afflicter?

Using the example of a couple of 200 pound people each with ST 10 squaring off, two hands can lift BLx8 in 4 seconds. Without using the Lifting skill or Extra Effort, you're looking at needing ST 12, 29*8=232. At Extra-Heavy Encumbrance Move is x0.2, base Move is TK level so 12/5=2.4

This would cost 60 points, and targets who are grapples then lifted can constantly try to "Break Free" every second, whereas there doesn't seem to be a way to struggle against a failed save vs. Affliction, once you fail it you are affected for the full duration...

I think maybe as a balance, to allow for directing warp, only allow the Afflictor to "choose a destination/target for the power by controlling it for one turn" and then they lose control of it.

For people who want people subject to wild flights, the "Uncontrollable" and "Unconscious Only" limitations are probably the way to go, but then it's at least the GM choosing where to Fly them and not the attacker

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Plane

For people who want people subject to wild flights, the "Uncontrollable" and "Unconscious Only" limitations are probably the way to go, but then it's at least the GM choosing where to Fly them and not the attacker

I just don't see how it makes sense to base the cost of that. You're actually making the Affliction cheaper while making it potentially more useful.

TK w/Uncontrollable is the "poltergeist" example in Powers, so it's already covered in a better way anyway.

[Culture20]

Originally Posted by naloth

I just don't see how it makes sense to base the cost of that. You're actually making the Affliction cheaper while making it potentially more useful.

TK w/Uncontrollable is the "poltergeist" example in Powers, so it's already covered in a better way anyway.

TK w/uncontrollable and always on would not be flight with uncontrollable and always on. One is centered on the TK wielder, and moves objects. The other is centered on the flyer and moves the flyer. The Wizard’s disks are fire-and-forget. He does not have to remain in range of the target. The “control” is on the target’s side, but there are limitations on the afflicted advantage.
Uncontrollable TK, always on, plus independant, maybe, but it would have no affliction, and Bently can spam antigravity disks all day, while TK isn’t infinitely parallelizable and still has a limited range, even while independant. Afflicted flight is the simplest model.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Culture20

<snip>

All those sound good reasons, why it's not a cheap ability that you can spam.

TK works best as a cost comparison of what you could otherwise do, even if you model if differently. If you can throw people to orbit via flight at a fraction of the cost that it would take to TK them across the room, something is out of proportion.

You can actually model it very easily as a TK "throw" by figuring out how far "up" (basically 1/2 horizontal distance) they would fall and moving them at either a constant velocity or a reversed velocity as a special effect.

Afflicted flight is the simplest model.

Except that Affliction doesn't say anything about letting you take initial or subsequent maneuvers on the target's behalf, without which no movement will occur. Perhaps you were going to follow it up with a Mind Control effect such as "float foolishly upwards"?

[Culture20]

Originally Posted by naloth

All those sound good reasons, why it's not a cheap ability that you can spam.

TK works best as a cost comparison of what you could otherwise do, even if you model if differently. If you can throw people to orbit via flight at a fraction of the cost that it would take to TK them across the room, something is out of proportion.

You can actually model it very easily as a TK "throw" by figuring out how far "up" (basically 1/2 horizontal distance) they would fall and moving them at either a constant velocity or a reversed velocity as a special effect.

Except that Affliction doesn't say anything about letting you take initial or subsequent maneuvers on the target's behalf, without which no movement will occur. Perhaps you were going to follow it up with a Mind Control effect such as "float foolishly upwards"?

I’m assuming you’re misinterpreting me. I’m talking about an ability which neither the initiator (afflictor) nor the affected (afflicted) controls once started. There have been instances of afflicted victims gaining control of the disks, and controlling the flight.
Afflicted uncontrollable TK wouldn’t work because that would make the target have a poltergeist which moves objects around them. Generic uncontrollable TK sans affliction also doesn’t work because there’s no way to say “it only affects this person, and when I say so”. Afflicted Flight with limitations of always on and uncontrollable is the ability I’m describing, to a T. That it costs less points has no bearing on the matter.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Culture20

I’m assuming you’re misinterpreting me.

I just disagree with your series of assumptions. I don't see them as backed up by the rules.

I’m talking about an ability which neither the initiator (afflictor) nor the affected (afflicted) controls once started. There have been instances of afflicted victims gaining control of the disks, and controlling the flight.

You've made an assumption that having Flight as an advantage obligates you to move or that it giving it allows either you or the Afflictor to create later movement. You don't "activate" Flight, make a roll, and end up in a place like Warp. Move takes place as a maneuver, and flight gives you another move type and speed you can use to get there.

As for the "gaining control of disks", there are a number of ways to represent that on any ability. In many cases fiddling with high tech stuff (Spidey, Mr Fantastic) is part of their power shtick. In other cases, it could be a limitation that an IQ roll can safely disengage and let you escape without going into orbit.

Afflicted uncontrollable TK wouldn’t work because that would make the target have a poltergeist which moves objects around them. Generic uncontrollable TK sans affliction also doesn’t work because there’s no way to say “it only affects this person, and when I say so”.

I told you would I would base it off of, which wouldn't be uncontrollable anything. (Uncontrollable was for a poltergeist effect, not a predictable, straight line, move that occurs on demand).

Afflicted Flight with limitations of always on and uncontrollable is the ability I’m describing, to a T. That it costs less points has no bearing on the matter.

You can play it that way if you like, but it doesn't pass any of the tests.

Uncontrollable is defined as under GM's control if you fail a stress roll, and only "potentially embarrassing, but not dangerous" for Flight. Flying off in towards space in a predictable effect that happens on command, without any stress roles doesn't match that to any letter including T.

Limitations which don't reduce the effectiveness of an ability aren't valid limitations. It sounds like you are using Uncontrollable to justify moving the target against his will in later turns which would be a massive, unrelated upgrade.

As for cost comparison, that's what point systems are for. Coming up with a questionable way to do something that's done similarly elsewhere as a primary ability for cheaper should always be questioned. Is there a better ability than TK to use to compare what it would usually cost to throw someone around at a range?

[Plane]

I'm not sure if you can even make the Advantage: X enhancement cheaper by adding Unconscious+Uncontrollable to the underlying advantage which determines its cost (points*10=%), for non-instant abilities which last MoF minutes. It almost seems like they would work that way by default?

I believe it says something like if the advantage is switchable, it remains switched on, not that the Afflictor can choose to switch it on and off at a whim (at best they could switch it off once via Cancellatio if they have that enhancement and hit you with the Cancellation Ray)

Flight is already switched on by default, I think, and enhancing it with switchability probably is pointless unless you were wanting some Temporary Disadvantages discounts.

The way non-beneficial Affliction works with advantages that are not instant or passive really needs some illustrative examples regarding who is in control, and how.

Maybe a good compromise would be that Air Move can only be utilized if BOTH the afflictor and the target take a Move maneuver in tandem, cooperatively?