Spells, and a question
Aug. 2nd, 2005 02:08 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
ironphoenix.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
ratcatchers[moved from ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
ironphoenix, where I posted it first by mistake--thanks, ms_danson for noticing!]
I've added some limitations (gestures, RSR, etc.) to reduce the CP cost of the glamour and lie detector powers.
I've also created a couple of force field powers:
The idea here is that in a firefight, Sean can protect himself and up to 2 other people (partners, bystanders, whoever) with 8 PD or better force fields. The UOO version can work with a single target, and can also target Sean himself.
A question about Active Points, Real Points, and Character Points:
In my understanding of the rules as written, the Active Points of a power are determined by multiplying the base AP cost by (1+total adders), and the Real Point cost is obtained by dividing this Active Point cost by (1+total limitations). For an MPP slot, the Character Point cost is then calculated by dividing this Real Point cost by 5 or 10. Each of these costs is rounded in turn, so a 25 AP power with a +1/4 adder and a -1/2 limitation in a variable MPP slot would have an AP cost of 25*5/4 = 31.25 ==> 31 AP, an RP cost of 31/(3/2) = 20.667 ==> 21 RP, and a CP cost of 21/5 = 4.2 ==> 4 CP.
There are times where I believe that this rule of thumb for application of adders and limitations to Active and Real points respectively should not be followed. When the adder increases the applicability of the power (e.g. a power with a large number of charges), without increasing its effect, I believe the adder should be applied to the RP cost, not the AP cost. Similarly, when a limitation reduces the effect of a power (e.g. an ED force field with the limitation "only applies against fire-based attacks") should reduce its AP cost, not just its RP cost.
In general, I think that an adder which improves a power's attribute and a limitation which degrades it should apply to the same points. E.g., if the "increased endurance" limitation applies to RP, then so should the "reduced endurance" adder.
ironphoenix, where I posted it first by mistake--thanks, ms_danson for noticing!]I've added some limitations (gestures, RSR, etc.) to reduce the CP cost of the glamour and lie detector powers.
I've also created a couple of force field powers:
- a 15 PD variable force field (max 15 AP), pretty standard stuff, and
- a 12 PD variable force field, usable on others, 2 simultaneous targets, ranged (total of +1 adders) (max 24 AP).
The idea here is that in a firefight, Sean can protect himself and up to 2 other people (partners, bystanders, whoever) with 8 PD or better force fields. The UOO version can work with a single target, and can also target Sean himself.
A question about Active Points, Real Points, and Character Points:
In my understanding of the rules as written, the Active Points of a power are determined by multiplying the base AP cost by (1+total adders), and the Real Point cost is obtained by dividing this Active Point cost by (1+total limitations). For an MPP slot, the Character Point cost is then calculated by dividing this Real Point cost by 5 or 10. Each of these costs is rounded in turn, so a 25 AP power with a +1/4 adder and a -1/2 limitation in a variable MPP slot would have an AP cost of 25*5/4 = 31.25 ==> 31 AP, an RP cost of 31/(3/2) = 20.667 ==> 21 RP, and a CP cost of 21/5 = 4.2 ==> 4 CP.
There are times where I believe that this rule of thumb for application of adders and limitations to Active and Real points respectively should not be followed. When the adder increases the applicability of the power (e.g. a power with a large number of charges), without increasing its effect, I believe the adder should be applied to the RP cost, not the AP cost. Similarly, when a limitation reduces the effect of a power (e.g. an ED force field with the limitation "only applies against fire-based attacks") should reduce its AP cost, not just its RP cost.
In general, I think that an adder which improves a power's attribute and a limitation which degrades it should apply to the same points. E.g., if the "increased endurance" limitation applies to RP, then so should the "reduced endurance" adder.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-08-02 06:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-02 06:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-02 06:27 pm (UTC)Assuming the former, this would be fairly similar to the gestures used for the Ratcatcher's defensive force field, with minor variations.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-02 06:33 pm (UTC)