Barnum

I was inspired by your post, so I woke up to the Beach Boys this morning. That kind of pop takes some getting used to, but I like it. :D

Announcing "Gold" Player Status! In an effort to reward players that have demonstrated longevity and commitment by actively role-playing the same character over a lengthy span of months, we will be awarding players who have earned 31+ PPs with a single character "Gold" Status. What does it mean to be "Gold"? I'm glad you asked. Gold players will be allowed to have two PL 10+ characters instead of the normal PL 10+ and PL 6+. Gold players with an existing PL 6+ character can immediately advance it to PL 10 (if they want), and any new characters they create (after retiring old ones) can be created at any PL between 6 and 10. Players are still, however, limited to only two active characters at once. So . . . a big thanks to our dedicated players! Keep up the good work. Oh, and keep and eye out for "Platinum" status . . . coming soon. ;)

We did not need to hear that. Consider yourself warned.

It's a bit of an oversimplification to say so, but UP essentially turned Alternate Powers into a container (power structure, really). And I have a personal dislike for Flawing structures/containers. The savings is usually over the top, especially if the powers inside the structure/container are also flawed. I do realize, however, that my preference isn't everyone's, that's why I usually defer to a second Ref on matters like this. As I said, in your case however, I'd be more worried about the Flaw being too limiting, as opposed to being not limiting enough for the savings (which is usually the case).

I think Sneak Attack is very useful, especially on bloated attack powers (high number of PPs/rank). I also tend to forget about it. Hence as forgettable as it is useful. Now if I had said, "as memorable as it is useful . . ." We may just be misunderstanding each other here, but I think there is a huge difference between "Something made up" like Kryptonite, and "something I just made up" like "Blooberite." If we were playing a game in the DC universe (for example), I might very well run into a player with Kryptonite (something made up), but will never run into "Blooberite" (something I just made up) unless the GM goes out of her way to throw it at me . . . something that will most likely never happen here (see below). Most players are writing their own stories, even when there is a Ref involved. Players can easily avoid the object of their drawbacks, if the drawbacks are carefully chosen (like weakness to a substance "I just made up."). Players can easily avoid Refs altogether, if they want. That just isn't how drawbacks work around here. Which is exactly why I said that I didn't think it was a core part of the power he was describing. I would quote that part for you again, but you asked me not to. :clap: Honestly, I'd give Sneak Attack a "useful" coefficient of about 6 on most builds, but a forgetful coefficient (for me) of about 7. Most character builders aren't looking to build characters with sub-PL attack powers, and once they learn that Sneak Attacks can't break PL, they usually forget about it. Ergo, I almost never approve characters with Sneak Attacks. Ergo, I tend to forget about it. It's a fact that I'm not proud of. :cry:

Oh that it were true . . .

2. Doh! I completely missed that. Makes perfect sense. 4. Yeah, I don't think I got all those DAPs in there. 26 PPs is correct. 6. I misunderstood what you were trying to do, and now that I know, I'm inclined to say no. Under the core system, the cost of the main power becomes the number of points available to the alt powers (sans any alt power feats). You are trying to get 32 PPs in the array but only paying 16 by adding the "check required" flaw. And then flawing the powers again inside the array. Honestly, that reeks of cheese. And having been at this for awhile now, I really think you are going to start hating having a 50% failure chance every time you try to do something. I also know that cheese can be very unpopular with the other players. But if another Ref approves, I won't object any further.

Read my sentence again. You will see your error, I think. If a GM was going to allow your opponents to move around behind you to bypass the Force Field, then I'd probably call it a -2 Flaw, because it is going to come up with just about every attack. Just about every character in M&M can move that far in a round, and just about every smart player will do it (if the GM house rules in some combat facing). That's not what I said, but I think you understood my point anyway. I also think you know that that isn't how drawbacks work around here. Wow. 0-3. Too bad. That isn't what I said either. I generally buy my powers "plane jane," and power stunt the fancy stuff. The Perception Strike with a comic-booky descriptor fits the concept he described just fine. If he wanted to do something fancy once in a while like attack from behind with an indirect, subtle sneak attack, that's just what stunts are for. ;)

Posted finally. Sorry for the delay.

Crouching down behind some parked cars, Ronin managed to attract quite a few stares from passers-by and curious watchers at office windows. Costumed combat wasn't an unheard of sight, for sure; this was Freedom City after all, but nonetheless it still attracted some stares. Ronin waited for the ambushers to exit the alley, but they never did. Slowly the smoke cleared revealing an empty alley. The attackers were nowhere in sight.

It is. We are usually very generous in allowing players to rearrange their powers like this when spending PPs. I have approved builds like that before in my own personal games, but to my knowledge we have never approved one like that here. We'd have to discuss it, if it is something you'd like to pursue. Personally, I don't have a problem with it.

Yes I did. The Sneak Attack feat is as forgettable as it is useful. Given that D20 doesn't have combat facing, that would be rare indeed. It would essentially be something like "Power Loss: Indirect Attacks or Attacks from behind" . . . about as forgettable and useful as Sneak Attack. Though now that you mention it, if anyone needs some free points that will likely never be an actual Drawback . . . add "Power Loss: Indirect Attacks" to the list, right under "Weakness: some substance I just made up." Seriously though, I would not buy the power with Indirect or Subtle. I would buy Strike X [Range] and if I ever needed ranks of Indirect or Subtle, I'd power stunt them. I wouldn't get stuck on this. It's fine if you want it, but arrays are not abilities. There is no reason why he could not have an independent Force Field with the same descriptors as the array. It would then be "tied to this abilitiy" too. Of course, it would cost more . . .

1. It looks like you bought your toughness up from +2 (Con) to +5 for 3 PPs. You cannot directly increase your Toughness like that. You can buy Protection, additional ranks of Force Field, Increase your Con, or buy Defensive Roll. 2. I'm not sure I understand this. You have 1 rank of attractive, Cha +3 and no ranks. Your modifier should be +7 here and for all the other skills like it. 3. Just for consistency, please change "Flaw" to "Drawback." 4. I can't get this to add up. Magic 16 with a -1 Flaw is 16 PPs. You have 5 Power Feats (21 PPs) and 5 Alt Powers (since the Blast power is free). That makes 26 PPs without subtracting your two drawbacks. This should cost 24 PPs. 5. With regard to drawbacks, we abide by the Core recommendation of capping Drawbacks at PL. You have 12 points in drawbacks right now by my count. That's two too many. 6. The main power in your first Magic array (Magic Missile) is over-priced at 32 PPs. You only have 21 PPs (19 if you keep the two drawbacks) in the array. 7. I am unwilling to approve a Continuous Emotion control, especially in an array. 8. I am also unwilling to approve Nullify (All). 9. The main power in your second Magic array (Astral Form) is over-priced at 26 PPs. You only have 12 PPs in the array to spend. Also, the 3rd Alt Power (Aegis Schism) is over priced at 21 PPs. 10. With regards to all of your "Check Required" flaws . . . we will not allow you to spend earned PPs to increase, in any way, this check above a 50% chance of success. As long as you are fine with the continual 50% failure chance (and all that extra dice rolling), have at it.

Surprise attacks only do two things: 1. Make the defender lose their dodge bonus to Defense against the attack. 2. Make the defender suffer an additional -2 to Defense against the attack. Perception range attacks ignore Defense. They always hit any target the attacker can accurately perceive. No attack roll is required. Ergo . . . any changes to Defense incurred by a surprise is moot. If the concern is to keep the attacker from knowing it was you that attacked, as you say, Subtle is what you want.

I can't think of any advantage to buying Indirect on a Perception ranged power, but that doesn't mean there isn't one. 1. As long as you can accurately sense the target, you can hit them with a Perception ranged power, whether they are right in front of you or on the other side of a wall. Indirect adds nothing to that ability. 2. As to punching someone in the back of the head, mechanically speaking, the only advantage to doing something like that is that it could count as a Surprise Attack . . . which is also completely moot on a Perception ranged power since it doesn't require an attack roll.

How about . . . Strike X [Extra] - 3 PPs per rank. If you plan on having a high-strength character you may want the Mighty Power Feat too, but if you do, the cost to up the range to Perception (2 PPs/rank) will also apply to your existing Str bonus. Or you could buy Blast with one or more ranks of the Indirect Power Feat.

Yeah . . . and could you turn it down a little. Thanks.

Welcome aboard. We are glad to have you too. *pokes Ryoga* You need an avatar. I did a Google image search and came up with . . . :D

Will do. Have a great summer! Don't shoot any little kids. :D

I would say that since sidekicks are limited to 1/2 the PL of their better half, devices made for or used by them should also be so limited. Basically any attempt to get around PL limits (of any kind) by Inventing or Ritualist is a bad idea in my book.

It sounded a little better than dis-archived . . . or de-archived. :D

Just a little reminder . . . As you may know, we regularly archive inactive characters. If one of your characters gets archived due to inactivity, have no fear; they can be un-archived just as easily. Once you are actually ready to begin posting with that character, send me a PM and I will restore it to its proper place in the Character Bank.

Archived due to inactivity.

Archived due to inactivity.

I think Lady Liberty may show up out of costume herself. I'm sure we can think of a reason (or three). :D