Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Question on Close Attack Damage

Expand Messages
  • Jakub
    ... I don t think that s wrong - that s why neither Superman nor Hulk use swords. That fits the genre. Weapons dealing average damage are supposed to give an
    Message 1 of 15 , Jul 10 2:33 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Douglas Parks <guodskrap@...> wrote:
      >
      > Greetings,
      >
      > The rules state this:
      >
      > • Close Attack: Inflicts damage equal to the attacker’s Strength if weaponless
      > or according to the weapon’s damage, if wielding a close attack weapon.
      >
      > This would seem to indicate that a person wielding a weapon could only do the
      > weapon's damage. So a super-strong (STR 8) person wielding a billy club (damage
      > 3) would do 3 damage, whereas he would do 8 with his bare hands.
      >
      > Is this correct, or are there extenuating circumstances that would change this?

      I don't think that's wrong - that's why neither Superman nor Hulk use swords. That fits the genre. Weapons dealing average damage are supposed to give an edge to the weaker opponents - street thug (S4) will be better than a wimp (S2), until the latter will get his hands on a crowbar (Dmg4).

      > As examples:
      > • A hero wielding his mighty hammer.

      Hammer might have additional powers. 'Weapon' here means normal, conventional weapon.

      > • A hero striking someone with an up-rooted phone pole.

      In this case I'd simply treat it as a one-time bonus of +1 to damage.

      > • A hero who transforms his hand into an anvil and strikes someone.
      That's a Strike power, not a weapon.


      > There are a few ways to modify the rule as presented, but I'm not sure which is
      > the most balanced for ICONS:
      > • Damage is equal to the person's Strength + weapon damage (may be too much)

      Definitely unbalanced.
      > • Damage is equal to the person's Strength or the weapon's damage, whichever is
      > greater (doesn't take into account leverage or really big weapons like buses or
      > Corinthian columns)

      Leverage is built into weapon ranges (reasonably telephone pole would allow you to attack people in the close range). Plus, actually, i'd personally treat the bus as a weapon dealing 7 or 8 damage.

      > • Damage is equal to the person's Strength, +1 for a weapon or object with a
      > damage or toughness equal to or greater than the hero's Strength -- so a STR 8
      > hero hitting someone with a tank (say, toughness 8) does 9 damage (doesn't
      > really take into account the effects of leverage)

      You can lift a tank with S 8, and while i'd allow you to throw it at someone or hit once, it'd probably would not make a good weapon. :)

      > • Damage is equal to the weapon, +1 if the person's Strength is greater than the
      > weapon's damage (doesn't reflect super-strength very well)

      Probably this is the best way to handle this. Remember, a +1 in scale could be a difference between Spider-man (S7) and Iron Man (8).

      > How would you handle this issue?
      >
      > --
      > Douglas Parks
      > Freelance Human Being

      Jakub Osiejewski
    • Rob Barrett
      I was thinking about how to represent the Fantastic Four in ICONS terms and realized that the Force Field power as written restricts the field s range to
      Message 2 of 15 , Jul 11 1:48 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        I was thinking about how to represent the Fantastic Four in ICONS terms and realized that the Force Field power as written restricts the field's range to "personal"--yet Sue Storm was routinely extending her field to "close" range in order to protect her teammates relatively early in the series. Is the intention that extending the force field is initially a stunt (and then, after 10 successful such stunts, a regular aspect of the power)? Or am I missing something in the rules?

        Thanks,

        Rob
      • Steve Kenson
        ... I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible Woman s Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental (Force)
        Message 3 of 15 , Jul 12 4:38 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          On Jul 12, 2010, at 6:00 AM, Rob Barrett wrote:
          I was thinking about how to represent the Fantastic Four in ICONS terms and realized that the Force Field power as written restricts the field's range to "personal"-- yet Sue Storm was routinely extending her field to "close" range in order to protect her teammates relatively early in the series. Is the intention that extending the force field is initially a stunt (and then, after 10 successful such stunts, a regular aspect of the power)?

          I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She regularly does quite a bit with it.

        • Robert Barrett
          ... The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done. Thanks, Rob
          Message 4 of 15 , Jul 12 11:18 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@...> wrote:

             

            I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She regularly does quite a bit with it.

            The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.

            Thanks,

            Rob
          • wee_ree_cat
            I m sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion. As they are written up in the book, Force Field and
            Message 5 of 15 , Nov 20, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.

              As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.

              I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".

              This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.


              --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@...> wrote:
              >
              > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              > >
              > > I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
              > > Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
              > > (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
              > > regularly does quite a bit with it.
              > >
              >
              > The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
              > there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
              >
              > Thanks,
              >
              > Rob
              >
            • John McMullen
              I agree.
              Message 6 of 15 , Nov 20, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                I agree.



                On 2011-11-20, at 9:00 PM, "wee_ree_cat" <wee_ree_cat@...> wrote:

                > I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.
                >
                > As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.
                >
                > I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".
                >
                > This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.
                >
                >
                > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@...> wrote:
                >>
                >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@...> wrote:
                >>
                >>
                >>>
                >>> I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
                >>> Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
                >>> (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
                >>> regularly does quite a bit with it.
                >>>
                >>
                >> The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
                >> there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
                >>
                >> Thanks,
                >>
                >> Rob
                >>
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
              • Soylent Green
                Oh totally. Stunts are one of the most fun parts of the system, they should always be an option. To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com From: wee_ree_cat@yahoo.fr Date:
                Message 7 of 15 , Nov 21, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  Oh totally. Stunts are one of the most fun parts of the system, they should always be an option.


                  To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
                  From: wee_ree_cat@...
                  Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 02:00:31 +0000
                  Subject: [icons-rpg] Re: Force Field Question

                   
                  I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.

                  As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.

                  I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".

                  This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.

                  --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > >
                  > > I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
                  > > Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
                  > > (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
                  > > regularly does quite a bit with it.
                  > >
                  >
                  > The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
                  > there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
                  >
                  > Thanks,
                  >
                  > Rob
                  >


                • John McMullen
                  Ahem. That was abrupt. Yeah, I think you trade the always- or mostly-on advantage of invulnerability for the ease of double talk explanations and stunting in
                  Message 8 of 15 , Nov 24, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Ahem. That was abrupt. Yeah, I think you trade the always- or mostly-on advantage of invulnerability for the ease of double talk explanations and stunting in force fields.

                    For a character who is going to do more stunting--say a trained normal with a force field belt and a flight ring--the force field offers lots more rationales: TK, blasts, affects phased, force wall, binding, blinding...

                    --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, John McMullen <jhmcmullen@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > I agree.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > On 2011-11-20, at 9:00 PM, "wee_ree_cat" <wee_ree_cat@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.
                    > >
                    > > As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.
                    > >
                    > > I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".
                    > >
                    > > This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@> wrote:
                    > >>
                    > >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@> wrote:
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >>>
                    > >>> I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
                    > >>> Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
                    > >>> (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
                    > >>> regularly does quite a bit with it.
                    > >>>
                    > >>
                    > >> The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
                    > >> there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
                    > >>
                    > >> Thanks,
                    > >>
                    > >> Rob
                    > >>
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > ------------------------------------
                    > >
                    > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • wee_ree_cat
                    Yes, that s what I think. A player who takes Force Field has probably decided of a power source for his character. And if he hasn t, he ends up thinking about
                    Message 9 of 15 , Nov 25, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Yes, that's what I think.

                      A player who takes Force Field has probably decided of a power source for his character. And if he hasn't, he ends up thinking about it for the rationales of new stunts. Stuff you can't do with invulnerability.

                      --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "John McMullen" <jhmcmullen@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > Ahem. That was abrupt. Yeah, I think you trade the always- or mostly-on advantage of invulnerability for the ease of double talk explanations and stunting in force fields.
                      >
                      > For a character who is going to do more stunting--say a trained normal with a force field belt and a flight ring--the force field offers lots more rationales: TK, blasts, affects phased, force wall, binding, blinding...
                      >
                      > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, John McMullen <jhmcmullen@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > I agree.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > On 2011-11-20, at 9:00 PM, "wee_ree_cat" <wee_ree_cat@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > > I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.
                      > > >
                      > > > As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.
                      > > >
                      > > > I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".
                      > > >
                      > > > This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@> wrote:
                      > > >>
                      > > >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@> wrote:
                      > > >>
                      > > >>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>> I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
                      > > >>> Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
                      > > >>> (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
                      > > >>> regularly does quite a bit with it.
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>
                      > > >> The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
                      > > >> there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
                      > > >>
                      > > >> Thanks,
                      > > >>
                      > > >> Rob
                      > > >>
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > ------------------------------------
                      > > >
                      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > >
                      >
                    • Soylent Green
                      That s all perfectly true. The other side of the equation is that by default Icons assumes random character generation so you wouldn t necessarily choose one
                      Message 10 of 15 , Nov 25, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        That's all perfectly true. The other side of the equation is that by default Icons assumes random character generation so you wouldn't necessarily choose one or the other.


                        To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
                        From: wee_ree_cat@...
                        Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 17:43:32 +0000
                        Subject: [icons-rpg] Re: Force Field Question

                         
                        Yes, that's what I think.

                        A player who takes Force Field has probably decided of a power source for his character. And if he hasn't, he ends up thinking about it for the rationales of new stunts. Stuff you can't do with invulnerability.

                        --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "John McMullen" <jhmcmullen@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        > Ahem. That was abrupt. Yeah, I think you trade the always- or mostly-on advantage of invulnerability for the ease of double talk explanations and stunting in force fields.
                        >
                        > For a character who is going to do more stunting--say a trained normal with a force field belt and a flight ring--the force field offers lots more rationales: TK, blasts, affects phased, force wall, binding, blinding...
                        >
                        > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, John McMullen <jhmcmullen@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > I agree.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > On 2011-11-20, at 9:00 PM, "wee_ree_cat" <wee_ree_cat@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > > I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.
                        > > >
                        > > > As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.
                        > > >
                        > > > I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".
                        > > >
                        > > > This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@> wrote:
                        > > >>
                        > > >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@> wrote:
                        > > >>
                        > > >>
                        > > >>>
                        > > >>> I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
                        > > >>> Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
                        > > >>> (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
                        > > >>> regularly does quite a bit with it.
                        > > >>>
                        > > >>
                        > > >> The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
                        > > >> there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
                        > > >>
                        > > >> Thanks,
                        > > >>
                        > > >> Rob
                        > > >>
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > ------------------------------------
                        > > >
                        > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >


                      • wee_ree_cat
                        Yep, that s what I had to explain to my players when they started complaining it wasn t very clever to have such unbalanced discrepancies between two powers.
                        Message 11 of 15 , Nov 25, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Yep, that's what I had to explain to my players when they started complaining it wasn't very clever to have such unbalanced discrepancies between two powers. It wasn't about force field and invulnerability (it could have been) but about chameleon and invisibility.

                          They threw a fit over the fact that the power description basically said "it's exactly like invisibility, but less efficient". So yeah. Random character generation was never an option, I used the Unverse Protocols creation right from the start, and when two different powers have that kind of problem well, just pick the right one and give it the appearance of the other if you want.


                          --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Soylent Green <gsoylent@...> wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > That's all perfectly true. The other side of the equation is that by default Icons assumes random character generation so you wouldn't necessarily choose one or the other.
                          >
                          > To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
                          > From: wee_ree_cat@...
                          > Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 17:43:32 +0000
                          > Subject: [icons-rpg] Re: Force Field Question
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Yes, that's what I think.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > A player who takes Force Field has probably decided of a power source for his character. And if he hasn't, he ends up thinking about it for the rationales of new stunts. Stuff you can't do with invulnerability.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "John McMullen" <jhmcmullen@> wrote:
                          >
                          > >
                          >
                          > >
                          >
                          > > Ahem. That was abrupt. Yeah, I think you trade the always- or mostly-on advantage of invulnerability for the ease of double talk explanations and stunting in force fields.
                          >
                          > >
                          >
                          > > For a character who is going to do more stunting--say a trained normal with a force field belt and a flight ring--the force field offers lots more rationales: TK, blasts, affects phased, force wall, binding, blinding...
                          >
                          > >
                          >
                          > > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, John McMullen <jhmcmullen@> wrote:
                          >
                          > > >
                          >
                          > > > I agree.
                          >
                          > > >
                          >
                          > > >
                          >
                          > > >
                          >
                          > > > On 2011-11-20, at 9:00 PM, "wee_ree_cat" <wee_ree_cat@> wrote:
                          >
                          > > >
                          >
                          > > > > I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > > As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > > I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > > This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@> wrote:
                          >
                          > > > >>
                          >
                          > > > >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@> wrote:
                          >
                          > > > >>
                          >
                          > > > >>
                          >
                          > > > >>>
                          >
                          > > > >>> I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
                          >
                          > > > >>> Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
                          >
                          > > > >>> (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
                          >
                          > > > >>> regularly does quite a bit with it.
                          >
                          > > > >>>
                          >
                          > > > >>
                          >
                          > > > >> The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
                          >
                          > > > >> there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
                          >
                          > > > >>
                          >
                          > > > >> Thanks,
                          >
                          > > > >>
                          >
                          > > > >> Rob
                          >
                          > > > >>
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > > ------------------------------------
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > > >
                          >
                          > > >
                          >
                          > >
                          >
                        • John McMullen
                          Right. Forgot that--I was deep in planning mode. But if you rolled both and had to choose...
                          Message 12 of 15 , Nov 25, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Right. Forgot that--I was deep in planning mode. 

                            But if you rolled both and had to choose...



                            On 2011-11-25, at 12:48 PM, Soylent Green <gsoylent@...> wrote:

                            That's all perfectly true. The other side of the equation is that by default Icons assumes random character generation so you wouldn't necessarily choose one or the other.


                            To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
                            From: wee_ree_cat@...
                            Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 17:43:32 +0000
                            Subject: [icons-rpg] Re: Force Field Question

                             
                            Yes, that's what I think.

                            A player who takes Force Field has probably decided of a power source for his character. And if he hasn't, he ends up thinking about it for the rationales of new stunts. Stuff you can't do with invulnerability.

                            --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "John McMullen" <jhmcmullen@...> wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > Ahem. That was abrupt. Yeah, I think you trade the always- or mostly-on advantage of invulnerability for the ease of double talk explanations and stunting in force fields.
                            >
                            > For a character who is going to do more stunting--say a trained normal with a force field belt and a flight ring--the force field offers lots more rationales: TK, blasts, affects phased, force wall, binding, blinding...
                            >
                            > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, John McMullen <jhmcmullen@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > I agree.
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > On 2011-11-20, at 9:00 PM, "wee_ree_cat" <wee_ree_cat@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > > I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.
                            > > >
                            > > > As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.
                            > > >
                            > > > I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".
                            > > >
                            > > > This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@> wrote:
                            > > >>
                            > > >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@> wrote:
                            > > >>
                            > > >>
                            > > >>>
                            > > >>> I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
                            > > >>> Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
                            > > >>> (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
                            > > >>> regularly does quite a bit with it.
                            > > >>>
                            > > >>
                            > > >> The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
                            > > >> there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
                            > > >>
                            > > >> Thanks,
                            > > >>
                            > > >> Rob
                            > > >>
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > ------------------------------------
                            > > >
                            > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > >
                            >


                          • Soylent Green
                            Hehe. I ve had that kind of conversation too, not with Icons some other game I can t recall. I think the issue was gliding or levitating vs flying. To:
                            Message 13 of 15 , Nov 25, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hehe. I've had that kind of conversation too, not with Icons some other game I can't recall. I think the issue was gliding or levitating vs flying.


                              To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
                              From: wee_ree_cat@...
                              Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 17:56:18 +0000
                              Subject: [icons-rpg] Re: Force Field Question

                               
                              Yep, that's what I had to explain to my players when they started complaining it wasn't very clever to have such unbalanced discrepancies between two powers. It wasn't about force field and invulnerability (it could have been) but about chameleon and invisibility.

                              They threw a fit over the fact that the power description basically said "it's exactly like invisibility, but less efficient". So yeah. Random character generation was never an option, I used the Unverse Protocols creation right from the start, and when two different powers have that kind of problem well, just pick the right one and give it the appearance of the other if you want.

                              --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Soylent Green <gsoylent@...> wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              > That's all perfectly true. The other side of the equation is that by default Icons assumes random character generation so you wouldn't necessarily choose one or the other.
                              >
                              > To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
                              > From: wee_ree_cat@...
                              > Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 17:43:32 +0000
                              > Subject: [icons-rpg] Re: Force Field Question
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Yes, that's what I think.
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > A player who takes Force Field has probably decided of a power source for his character. And if he hasn't, he ends up thinking about it for the rationales of new stunts. Stuff you can't do with invulnerability.
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "John McMullen" <jhmcmullen@> wrote:
                              >
                              > >
                              >
                              > >
                              >
                              > > Ahem. That was abrupt. Yeah, I think you trade the always- or mostly-on advantage of invulnerability for the ease of double talk explanations and stunting in force fields.
                              >
                              > >
                              >
                              > > For a character who is going to do more stunting--say a trained normal with a force field belt and a flight ring--the force field offers lots more rationales: TK, blasts, affects phased, force wall, binding, blinding...
                              >
                              > >
                              >
                              > > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, John McMullen <jhmcmullen@> wrote:
                              >
                              > > >
                              >
                              > > > I agree.
                              >
                              > > >
                              >
                              > > >
                              >
                              > > >
                              >
                              > > > On 2011-11-20, at 9:00 PM, "wee_ree_cat" <wee_ree_cat@> wrote:
                              >
                              > > >
                              >
                              > > > > I'm sorry to RAISE DEAD on this topic, but I find myself conflicted and I need your opinion.
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > > As they are written up in the book, Force Field and Invulnerability are basically the same thing, except that you can lose your force field if your willpower fails you.
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > > I think it's reason enough to treat it as something you can extend (as a stunt maybe, as it was proposed here, or even as part of the power right from the start) instead of going with "force manipulation".
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > > This is probably what I'm going to do anyway, but I wanted to hear contrary opinions, if there are any (insecure rule-tinkerer syndrom). Also, it's no really big deal since it's for a friendly NPC, but who knows.
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > > --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, Robert Barrett <maltesechangeling@> wrote:
                              >
                              > > > >>
                              >
                              > > > >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Kenson <stevekenson@> wrote:
                              >
                              > > > >>
                              >
                              > > > >>
                              >
                              > > > >>>
                              >
                              > > > >>> I treat extending a Force Field as a bonus power or stunt. The Invisible
                              >
                              > > > >>> Woman's Force Field power might be considered a full-fledged Elemental
                              >
                              > > > >>> (Force) Control, capable of attacking, defending, moving, and shaping. She
                              >
                              > > > >>> regularly does quite a bit with it.
                              >
                              > > > >>>
                              >
                              > > > >>
                              >
                              > > > >> The Elemental Control (Force) option is definitely the way to go
                              >
                              > > > >> there--that, Invisibility, and Invisibility Ray get the job done.
                              >
                              > > > >>
                              >
                              > > > >> Thanks,
                              >
                              > > > >>
                              >
                              > > > >> Rob
                              >
                              > > > >>
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > > ------------------------------------
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > > >
                              >
                              > > >
                              >
                              > >
                              >


                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.