castling teleport

[naloth]

I've having problems re-designing my 3rd edition castling teleporter. Here's what I currently have:

• IQ 12, Teleport Talent 4 (Psi)
• Warp (Reliable +10 +50%, Link 20%, X-Hvy Enc +50%, max 10 yds -50%, Psi -10%) [110]
  
• Afflication (Warp* +1500%, Link +10%, Malediction +200%, Psi -10%) [180]
  *Warp (Reliable +10 +50%, X-Hvy +50%, max 10 yds -50%)

Given IQ 12, max 10 yds, +10 reliable, and +4 talent he rolls vs a 16 to be able to teleport.

Commentary:
1) I took a non-reciprocial because he can 'port to places where there's nothing but air (no resist roll), but he cannot afflict warp w/o teleporting to that spot.

2) He can teleport as a defense, but does the linked ability also get launched? I realize it's a gamble, but he should be able to try to switch places with someone as a defense. If he cannot do this, what would it take to be able to do it?

3) Does talent add to both the Malediction (Will vs HT contest) and his IQ roll to 'port? I would guess yes (Warp is just a special case), but other opinions are welcome.

4) How would you represent that the success of his warp is directly tied to the success of the afflication - if either fail, nothing happens?

5) I'm considering it a special effect that he cannot drift since he only fails on a critical failure and that carries it own penalties.

[naloth]

Just to be absolutely clear the biggest problem is that I want to use the Afflication as part of a defense. In this case it's to switch places with someone; however, it would be equally valid to 'port something/someone in the way (as a different character concept).

[Captain-Captain]

Teleport as a spell isn't a defense. See Blink.

Warp has a Blink enhancement. +25%.

Teleport Other/Blink Other are what you're using Affliction ((dis?)Advantage) Warp for. Apply the blink enhancement there as well.

As for porting someone/something in the way... Snatcher.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Captain-Captain

Teleport as a spell isn't a defense. See Blink.

We're using advantages, not spells. Warp even w/o blink can be used as a defense.

Warp has a Blink enhancement. +25%.

That eliminates the -10 in exchange for sending you in a random direction. Warp already includes the ability to make a dodge 'port to where you want ot go at -10.

Teleport Other/Blink Other are what you're using Affliction ((dis?)Advantage) Warp for. Apply the blink enhancement there as well.

That won't work for 2 reasons. First, you cannot normally use an affliction as a defense especially one that takes a concentrate manuever (malediction). Second, blink would be a random 'port where you are trying to 'port a specific target in the way.

As for porting someone/something in the way... Snatcher.

A whole different set of problems, not the least of which you don't choose one specific target.

Example: 2 policemen are firing at Rook (my castling teleporter). Rook castles with one of the officiers as a defense placing the officer where he was and Rook where the officer was (if every roll is made). Officer is inserted into the line of fire presumably with a very good chance of getting hit. I'm costing this ability.

Example 2: Exo-port guy sees a thug with an SMG about to open fire. His dodge sucks so he instead teleports a nearby and pretty large barrier into the way. I would like to cost this ability as well.

[Captain-Captain]

Originally Posted by naloth

We're using advantages, not spells. Warp even w/o blink can be used as a defense.


That eliminates the -10 in exchange for sending you in a random direction. Warp already includes the ability to make a dodge 'port to where you want ot go at -10.


That won't work for 2 reasons. First, you cannot normally use an affliction as a defense especially one that takes a concentrate manuever (malediction). Second, blink would be a random 'port where you are trying to 'port a specific target in the way.


A whole different set of problems, not the least of which you don't choose one specific target.

Example: 2 policemen are firing at Rook (my castling teleporter). Rook castles with one of the officiers as a defense placing the officer where he was and Rook where the officer was (if every roll is made). Officer is inserted into the line of fire presumably with a very good chance of getting hit. I'm costing this ability.

Example 2: Exo-port guy sees a thug with an SMG about to open fire. His dodge sucks so he instead teleports a nearby and pretty large barrier into the way. I would like to cost this ability as well.

Sorry. I read "Castling" as Casting and assumed you were converting the spells to a Power structure.

1) Using the Affliction for a defense is doable. Buy Compartmentalized Mind with the limit ONLY for Defense use of Affliction. You then have an extra mental action that turn to activate the Affliction defensively. I'd call it a -60% limit on Compartmentalized Mind so it would add [20] to the power.

2) It's still Snatcher. You just have a nuissance effect that causes something local that looks exactly like whatever it was you snatched from the Cosmos to vanish while you use the Snatcher power. Further nuissance. Any damage done to the 'Snatched' object is applied to the object that vanished. -20% for the nuissance assuming he's subject to lawsuits for property damage etc.

[EvilKobra]

Throw in ETS for added fun :-)

This lets you react to a gun being fired - which in turn means the shooter is liable to eat his own bullet!

That just has to be one of the most beautiful uses ever of a Wait maneuver :-D

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Captain-Captain

Sorry. I read "Castling" as Casting and assumed you were converting the spells to a Power structure.

Oh.

1) Using the Affliction for a defense is doable. Buy Compartmentalized Mind with the limit ONLY for Defense use of Affliction. You then have an extra mental action that turn to activate the Affliction defensively. I'd call it a -60% limit on Compartmentalized Mind so it would add [20] to the power.

I don't understand why you would buy an extra mental action which presumably doesn't act any faster than your first mental action. I'm not trying to use the power once - just once per turn either as a normal action or as a defense.

2) It's still Snatcher. You just have a nuissance effect that causes something local that looks exactly like whatever it was you snatched from the Cosmos to vanish while you use the Snatcher power. Further nuissance. Any damage done to the 'Snatched' object is applied to the object that vanished. -20% for the nuissance assuming he's subject to lawsuits for property damage etc.

There are a number of problems associated with this:
1) Snatcher takes a base 10 seconds, and the objects disappear back to their point of origin after a while.
2) Snatcher assumes that you're picking an object. It doesn't really provide for snatching a person within 10 yds.
3) It's a horrific roll (and cost) to snatch a unique large item. -Remember we want to be able to use this on opponents to put them in the path of friendly fire.
4) You're already paying for the ability to Warp and probably Afflication-Warp. Why buy a 3rd ability do what the 2nd ability already does?

[PK]

Originally Posted by naloth

I've having problems re-designing my 3rd edition castling teleporter. Here's what I currently have:

• IQ 12, Teleport Talent 4 (Psi)
• Warp (Reliable +10 +50%, Link 20%, X-Hvy Enc +50%, max 10 yds -50%, Psi -10%) [110]
• Afflication (Warp* +1500%, Link +10%, Malediction +200%, Psi -10%) [180]
  *Warp (Reliable +10 +50%, X-Hvy +50%, max 10 yds -50%)

1) I took a non-reciprocial because he can 'port to places where there's nothing but air (no resist roll), but he cannot afflict warp w/o teleporting to that spot.

I would reduce the cost of this ability by giving the Afflicted Warp "Accessibility, Only to my previous position, -20%". Since you get no choice on where to send them, you should save some points.

2) He can teleport as a defense, but does the linked ability also get launched? I realize it's a gamble, but he should be able to try to switch places with someone as a defense. If he cannot do this, what would it take to be able to do it?

I would require that you add Reduced Time 1 to the Affliction. (Hey, I just saved ya 20 points, so you can afford 2. <g>) That makes it a free action, and so it isn't really an issue if if activates mid-turn. I could see an argument for requiring Reflexive instead, but I don't think it's necessary.

3) Does talent add to both the Malediction (Will vs HT contest) and his IQ roll to 'port? I would guess yes (Warp is just a special case), but other opinions are welcome.

I would say yes. They're both rolls to use your power.

4) How would you represent that the success of his warp is directly tied to the success of the afflication - if either fail, nothing happens?

One of the nice things about Link is that it lets you resolve a two-part ability with one roll -- but in this case you've got one ability that takes a Warp roll and one that takes an Affliction then a Warp roll. The simplest way to handle that is to consider the Affliction roll its own thing and then link the Warp rolls into one.

I'd also call it a -10% limitation on your standalone Warp, perhaps a Nuisance Effect.

5) I'm considering it a special effect that he cannot drift since he only fails on a critical failure and that carries it own penalties.

Drift is a limitation. If he doesn't take it, he doesn't drift.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Rev_Pee_Kitty

Drift is a limitation. If he doesn't take it, he doesn't drift.

I meant in the sense that he cannot end up going some place he did not intend so (per normal critical failures). Instead I'm going to inflict power failure for 10 minutes on any failure (as per normal failure but w/o the ability to use it at -5). Perhaps this qualifies as "Reliable"?

[PK]

Originally Posted by naloth

I meant in the sense that he cannot end up going some place he did not intend so (per normal critical failures). Instead I'm going to inflict power failure for 10 minutes on any failure (as per normal failure but w/o the ability to use it at -5). Perhaps this qualifies as "Reliable"?

Ah. Hmm. Yeah, that seems like a fair tradeoff to me. After all, sometimes going ANYWHERE is better than going nowhere; while sometimes going to the wrong place is worse than staying where you are.