Afflictions with Follow-Up and Multiple Carriers

[SchmugginsTheDwarve]

I came up with a hypothetical super with Affliction(s) representing both injected venom and poison-covered spiky natural armor (like hedgehogs, which rub poisonous plants on their spines, except this guy produces his own poison). The character would have both Spines and an appropriate Striker or Natural Weapon (a venomous spike-covered tail).

Would it make more sense to give this character a single Affliction with Follow-up: Carrier (Active [Tail Spikes] AND Passive [Spines]) for +0% or maybe some higher cost, or would the character need to be created with two separate Afflictions - one with Follow-up: Carrier (Active) and another Affliction as a (1/5) Alternate Ability that has Follow-up: Carrier (Passive)?

Thanks!

[Gumby Bush]

I'd call it Follow-Up (Either Spines or Tail) +10%;

Treating the ability to switch the limitation version on and off as a +5% enhancement akin to the Switchable Disadvantage perk. Similar logic with boosting the +0% to +5%.

You might build it both ways and see what the cost difference is.

[SchmugginsTheDwarve]

My napkin calculations say that having a 5% or even 20% modifier will be cheaper. I was thinking along the lines of the Switchable +10% Enhancement from Powers, but that's specifically for "on" and "off", not "function 1" and "function 2".

[naloth]

Spines cannot normally be used offensively. It's not really a good choice for a follow-up attack.

This should be an aura IA with a follow up attack on that instead. That way it triggers when you are hit or when you hit someone else.

[SchmugginsTheDwarve]

Interesting idea! and definitely strictly better than just Spines.

EDIT: ignore this complaint, I misunderstood Auras at Melee range, I've only ever used them at longer ranges before that made the whole Striker thing moot.

That does seem to lose a potential advantage, though: one could make the tail Striker long for +1 (or however much) Reach and deliver the poison at that distance (I had conceived of the character with a long Striker, I should have mentioned that), but if only using a spiny "Aura" is a carrier you'd be restricted to hitting Close enemies with the venom Affliction only.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by naloth

Spines cannot normally be used offensively. It's not really a good choice for a follow-up attack.

That's why Follow-up is -50% for a "passive carrier attack such as Spines", rather than 0% for the usual "active" kind.

This is one reason I'd find it hard to argue for a single attack that has Follow-up, using either of two different carriers. Is the Follow-up priced at 0% or -50%? Can't be both. There's also the question of whether it's even possible to use a single attack ability, modified with Follow-up, with more than one other attack ability as its carrier. (Follow-up text says "Pick a different attack as the carrier", which is singular.)

So queue the debate about whether this case needs four attacks or just three, whether it's abusive to allow one Follow-up to ride on all your attacks, and what an appropriate Enhancement (or re-pricing of Follow-up) should be to allow the Follow-up to switch between a set of carriers. Is something like Selectivity enough? Do you need an AA group of Follow-ups (and don't forget the turn to switch the active ability in an AA)? Cosmic +50% to ignore the "a" in the "Select a different attack" rule, and allow it to be plural? Buy the Follow-up one time at full price for each carrier?

Off the cuff, I lean most toward an AA group of Follow-ups. The character has to concentrate and spend a second oozing out some poison in the appropriate place -- not out of concept. Getting to apply it freely to any attack at will seems a little too good.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

That's why Follow-up is -50% for a "passive carrier attack such as Spines", rather than 0% for the usual "active" kind.

I'm aware. Perhaps it would be clearer to say that what was recommended above wasn't good in for what they were trying to accomplish.

This is one reason I'd find it hard to argue for a single attack that has Follow-up, using either of two different carriers. Is the Follow-up priced at 0% or -50%? Can't be both. There's also the question of whether it's even possible to use a single attack ability, modified with Follow-up, with more than one other attack ability as its carrier. (Follow-up text says "Pick a different attack as the carrier", which is singular.)

Yes, I usually keep it to a single attack vector.

IA (piercing or impaling; Aura +80%; Melee -30%; Always On if you can't turn it off at -10% or -20%*) is a single attack that can be used both offensively and is triggered if someone touches you as well. From there you can by the IA (Follow-Up 0%) normally.

*Spines that you can't turn off aren't as bad as being on fire (-30%). I'd say -10% if they can be avoided by being super careful or -20% if they can't be avoided.

Off the cuff, I lean most toward an AA group of Follow-ups. The character has to concentrate and spend a second oozing out some poison in the appropriate place -- not out of concept. Getting to apply it freely to any attack at will seems a little too good.

If someone has long needles with venom everywhere it makes sense that you would get stuck either punching them or being punched by them. I'd avoid switching for that explanation.

[Donny Brook]

What about buy Spines and a Striker and Link them and put Followup on the Spines?

[SchmugginsTheDwarve]

Interesting idea, I wasn't aware that Spines (being purely defensive) + a conventional attack (like a Striker (brawling) blow) would be a valid target for Link.

[Donny Brook]

You'd need to use the +20% optional version of Link to preserve the passive functions of the Spines.