Questions about Innate Attack (Wall)

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Varyon

That is indeed the reference.

Working with 2x2 (2 yards wide, 2 yards high, 1 yard thick) blocks while using a hex map works rather well. Naturally it's less important with the +30% version since it only do a single shape (defined when you purchase the ability). However, it's really useful to keep the 60% (defined each time you use it) from turning into a math exercise.

It's less area (4cy rather than 6cy), but I find multiples of 2 friendlier to work with and would rather make the difference up in side benefits. Also, I allow Wall to be taken without Area (since the first level multiplies it by 2 anyway).

<snip climbing discussion>

I usually consider that a special effect unless you can change it. At that point it's a very minor enhancement that I'd roll into Selective Effect if that's being taken anyway.

No, no, and also no. Create is horrendously expensive (and has weird rules around how long its constructs last)

Agreed.

That's... not a bad idea. I'd put a Limitation on the Binding that it only serves to make the Wall harder to detach from an anchor point (normally, wherever the Binding was, anyone who was in contact with that hex/those hexes would be stuck fast by the Binding).

Seems unnecessary. I've always considered it a special effect to define walls as either
a) constructs that can't move (need to be destroyed)
or
b) physical objects (mass based on HP) that work like any other objects.

Absolutely (and No Signature shouldn't make the Wall invisible, just prevent it from being obvious that you made it, and leave no evidence behind of its existence once it vanishes or destroyed; you need Sneak Attack to be truly invisible, as that results in someone running into it because they didn't know it was there). The question is more if the Wall should obscure vision.

Yes, I tried allowing No Sig invisible walls. It was definitely too cheap for the benefits. Invisible attacks should be a type of Cosmic for sneak attacks that remove your active defenses.

As for obscuring walls, I've always considered that a special effect if the opaqueness was defined during ability creation.

I personally feel that Wall +30% should let you setup the Wall in any pattern you'd like, but only when designing the power - if your Wall is a chevron, it will always be a chevron (although if you later add more Area Effect, you can designate where the new sections show up when buying that... but then those are locked in place as well). Wall +60%, however, allows you to set it each time you use the power.

That's how I've always played it.

Having given it further thought, I've changed my mind about Bulking Up - you can layer Walls behind each other, even in the same hex (thickness permitting), but these are explicitly different Walls, you cannot combine their DR and HP (or damage, if permeable).

I've always treated them as explicitly different walls with their own stats for destruction/damage allowing you to blow through one at a time. Of course, I also treat each 2x2 section as its own as well for damage purposes which allows them to last longer if you're using them as shields or structures. If your whole wall is destroyed when any section is destroyed, that's a limitation.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by naloth

Working with 2x2 (2 yards wide, 2 yards high, 1 yard thick) blocks while using a hex map works rather well. Naturally it's less important with the +30% version since it only do a single shape (defined when you purchase the ability). However, it's really useful to keep the 60% (defined each time you use it) from turning into a math exercise.

Are you suggesting using 2x2x1 blocks rather than the 4x1x1 blocks Wall normally uses (effectively doubling width by halving height)? Or are you saying to reduce the height from 4 yards to 2 yards, and mostly just handle it in 2x2x1 blocks?

Originally Posted by naloth

I usually consider that a special effect unless you can change it. At that point it's a very minor enhancement that I'd roll into Selective Effect if that's being taken anyway.

Rolling the ability to set it upon using the Wall into Selective Effect (rather than making it its own Enhancement) probably isn't a bad idea, honestly. I do feel that a worse penalty than -4 to Climbing should be worth points, but maybe that's just being nitpicky.

Originally Posted by naloth

Seems unnecessary. I've always considered it a special effect to define walls as either
a) constructs that can't move (need to be destroyed)
or
b) physical objects (mass based on HP) that work like any other objects.

To be clear, I'm actually suggesting Walls be handled as you describe, with the option to choose if it's (a) or (b) upon creating the ability. Plane's suggestion for Binding is something I might be inclined to use for a case where I want to build a Wall to function like (b), but be more difficult to shift around than its HP (and thus weight) indicates.

Originally Posted by naloth

Yes, I tried allowing No Sig invisible walls. It was definitely too cheap for the benefits. Invisible attacks should be a type of Cosmic for sneak attacks that remove your active defenses.

There's actually a Surprise Attack Enhancement (which I've been misnaming "Sneak Attack" in the thread) in PU4: Enhancements. I can't check my books at the moment (used the free preview to check the name), but it's one that makes the attack harder to detect in such as way that you may be denied an Active Defense. I think it does this by attacking from outside your range of vision, but repurposing it for invisible Walls seems appropriate.

Originally Posted by naloth

As for obscuring walls, I've always considered that a special effect if the opaqueness was defined during ability creation.

There are two issues with this, I feel. The first is that it allows you to basically grab Obscure 10 (Vision; Extended; Ranged) as a free "gimme" with your Wall (even a weak, 1 point Wall could work here). The second is that you may want a Wall that obscures more than just vision (like my suggestion of a sound-proof or scent-blocking one, or one that blocks some flavor(s) of Detect, or whatever), or you may want to be able to define what wavelengths of light it's opaque to. Obscure lets you do all that.

Originally Posted by naloth

I've always treated them as explicitly different walls with their own stats for destruction/damage allowing you to blow through one at a time. Of course, I also treat each 2x2 section as its own as well for damage purposes which allows them to last longer if you're using them as shields or structures. If your whole wall is destroyed when any section is destroyed, that's a limitation.

My intent is to treat each 1x1 section as its own thing (although attacks that naturally hit more than one assess them together - an SM+0 character using Slam to break through a Wall is going to leave a 2x1 hole). I'm considering having the loss of an adjacent section reduce current DR and HP by half, but am undecided.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Varyon

There are two issues with this, I feel. The first is that it allows you to basically grab Obscure 10 (Vision; Extended; Ranged) as a free "gimme" with your Wall (even a weak, 1 point Wall could work here). The second is that you may want a Wall that obscures more than just vision (like my suggestion of a sound-proof or scent-blocking one, or one that blocks some flavor(s) of Detect, or whatever), or you may want to be able to define what wavelengths of light it's opaque to. Obscure lets you do all that.

Given the usual cost between an Innate Attack with wall and Obscure I really don't consider a bit of vision blocking a big deal. A bit of vision blocking isn't an unbalanced special effect with a high cost ability. If it really worries you a house rule that you as GM will reject any a larger vision penalty than the number of dice in the IA nicely prevents what you seem to worry about. A 1d flaming wall might only be a -1 to peer through but a 10d+ flaming wall blazes enough to block vision entirely.

In any case a 1 point solid wall (which is what -- a fractional pi- attack with enhancements?) doesn't cover much, is a wall rather than area, and is destroyed by anything more powerful than a sneeze. I just don't see it upsetting game balance. The value of obscure is to coat an area in a field that can't easily be gotten rid of. Sure, you can do Wall on Obscure, but I would only consider linking it with a damage field (perhaps a sonic wall that captures noise) that can't be easily destroyed. If you wanted to create an area inside a wall construct where you couldn't even create light or sound, then link obscure.

[spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

Where can I find this stuff about 4 yards? On the other thread people were proposing 2 yards high...

12 feet is 4 yards, the 12 foot rule was cited in the other thread iirc.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

Where can I find this stuff about 4 yards? On the other thread people were proposing 2 yards high...

"Other people" was just you.