Self Harm Powers

[ChoTimberwolf]

Does the general modifier look good so:

Breaking the limits:
Some powers strain or even break the body using them.
This modifier can only be used with active powers or passive powers that require activation.
Activating the power inflicts 1 Wound (-2), 2 Wounds (-4), 3 Wounds (-6)
And/or
Inflicts 1 level of fatigue (-2), 2 level of fatigue (-4)
And/or
Incapitates the character (-4)

Does this modifier look good? Its for characters like in my hero academia or deadpool punching so hard he breaks his own body

[ValhallaGH]

Those examples are Power Stunts.
Deku starts with, like, five Points of powers. He relies almost exclusively on Power Stunts because he is a Power Level V character in a Power Level III campaign, which means his stunts have insane limits. He gets to add points as he slowly fills out his character sheet, completing quests to justify slowly getting his full power allotment.
Deadpool could have, quite reasonably, Power Stunted off his Regeneration for some Melee Attack that shatters himself. That's the narrative explanation for why it isn't one of his powers, a thing he can do if he has to but the price is too high to be used with any kind of regularity.

This is the second thread you've created with the unstated (and possibly unplanned) goal of creating a power to delete the Power Stunt rules. Which seems like an objectively terrible design choice.

[ChoTimberwolf]

Sorry but which power stunt would this one be? None of them leave the hero wounded or exhausted.

[ValhallaGH]

ChoTimberwolf Fatigue and Wounds are the trapping of why the stunt is temporary. They're descriptive, and playing them up can be rewarded with a Benny from the GM.

[ChoTimberwolf]

Thats an interesting point of view, but wounds and fatigue are not only roleplay opportunities or trappings they inflict penalties to rolls. You can use wounds as fluff, as trappings but thats not what I am talking about here.
Edit: With that argument any negative modifier should be deleted, requires touch etc can also be used as trappings

[ValhallaGH]

I'm not suggesting that the characters actually take levels of Wound or Fatigue when they do a Power Stunt. That would discourage them from doing the cool things that make the stories interesting and memorable.
I am stating that the characters are described as having taken one (or more) Wound(s) or become Fatigued / Exhausted as a result of pushing themselves and their powers in ways that are not sustainable. Since Power Stunts are explicitly about characters using super powers in ways those powers do not normally work, and cannot be used constantly, this is an excellent Trapping to maintain consistency in the narrative.

I am implying that your suggested modifiers would be actively punitive to the players, by binding their character's extremely limited Super Power Points to abilities that could be used at least as frequently by making those abilities Power Stunts. A design choice that would make the entire campaign less fun and less furious.
Which is why I think the suggested modifiers are bad game design at any values.

---

By contrast, the various negative modifiers in the text apply to powers that are capable of being used every Round of every minute of the entire day. Having to walk / fly / teleport over and touch people is a meaningful drawback to a power that is normally ranged, and worth a point reduction.
A power stunt that a character pays for with a Fatigue level instead of a Benny is not a viable negative modifier. It could be an interesting Setting Rule, but not a power modifier.

[Freemage]

I'm not suggesting that the characters actually take levels of Wound or Fatigue when they do a Power Stunt. That would discourage them from doing the cool things that make the stories interesting and memorable.
I am stating that the characters are described as having taken one (or more) Wound(s) or become Fatigued / Exhausted as a result of pushing themselves and their powers in ways that are not sustainable. Since Power Stunts are explicitly about characters using super powers in ways those powers do not normally work, and cannot be used constantly, this is an excellent Trapping to maintain consistency in the narrative.

I am implying that your suggested modifiers would be actively punitive to the players, by binding their character's extremely limited Super Power Points to abilities that could be used at least as frequently by making those abilities Power Stunts. A design choice that would make the entire campaign less fun and less furious.
Which is why I think the suggested modifiers are bad game design at any values.

---

By contrast, the various negative modifiers in the text apply to powers that are capable of being used every Round of every minute of the entire day. Having to walk / fly / teleport over and touch people is a meaningful drawback to a power that is normally ranged, and worth a point reduction.
A power stunt that a character pays for with a Fatigue level instead of a Benny is not a viable negative modifier. It could be an interesting Setting Rule, but not a power modifier.

Out of curiosity, why not? I mean, I agree that one could describe Power Stunts as being draining, or tapping hidden reserves, or whatever (hence the Benny). But why not allow a player who wishes to do so say, "This Power actually causes a level of Fatigue when he uses it, so he has to wait for awhile between uses, or it will KO him"?

Right now, your position is reading as if you feel these do something similar (limit the overall frequency a particular thing can be used), and that one is superior to the other, so therefore it must be the One True Way.

And we can already see that that isn't necessarily part of the design philosophy of the book--both the "Respec" and "Change Power Type" Power Stunts have fairly similar Modifiers (Power Set and Swtichable, respectively). So there existing overlap between Stunt and Modifier isn't a default argument against both existing, so long as there is a distinction between them. And in this proposal, I would argue, offers a very significant difference. Bennies are an expendable game resource--they're meant to be burned off. Wounds and Fatigue, OTOH, are normally meant to be avoided; ergo, accepting those as a consequence of your actions raises the stakes. In particular, a character who is out of bennies can still proceed on just fine, but the character who is taking Fatigue with every use of his Mind Control Power could theoretically render himself Incapacitated.

[ValhallaGH]

Out of curiosity, why not? I mean, I agree that one could describe Power Stunts as being draining, or tapping hidden reserves, or whatever (hence the Benny). But why not allow a player who wishes to do so say, "This Power actually causes a level of Fatigue when he uses it, so he has to wait for awhile between uses, or it will KO him"?

Which part?
That players who describe their Power Stunts as injurious or exhausting not take levels of Wounds or Fatigue? Because they spent a Benny to do the cool thing - a Benny is the system-designated price of Cool Stuff, so adding additional costs to that Cool Stuff is acting like a jerk and discouraging Cool Stuff. That makes the game less fun, which makes the game worse since fun is the entire point.

If a player character without bennies wanted to do a Power Stunt and was willing to incur a Wound or Fatigue level in compensation then I would probably make the table ruling to let it happen. It sounds like it's going to be a cool scene, which should be fun and fun is the goal of gaming, and the Fatigue / Wound would be a real price that should prevent any of the players from feeling like I was showing favoritism and giving out free stuff to only one person.

What I oppose, vocally, is tying that to Super Power Points. That idea smacks of making players spend extremely limited character resources to use a mechanic they should already be able to use.

Right now, your position is reading as if you feel these do something similar (limit the overall frequency a particular thing can be used), and that one is superior to the other, so therefore it must be the One True Way.

Then I wasn't clear.
In a game where Power Stunts exist (which means a game using the SPC), a power modifier that inflicts Wounds / Fatigue with each use of the power is a mechanic that punishes players for trying to do cool things, thereby making the game less fun for everyone. Which is bad.
If a campaign wanted to use a Setting Rule where Power Stunts could be paid for with Fatigue or Wounds, in lieu of a Benny, then that could be a fun Setting Rule. Which I said.
If the revised SPC includes an addition to the Power Stunt rules where characters without Bennies can take a Fatigue or Wound level to perform a Power Stunt then I will probably praise that as a good and positive addition to the rules.

But a mechanic that, functionally, requires spending Super Power Points solely to unlock a single power stunt is a bad mechanic. Which is what I tried to say.

[Freemage]

Which part?
That players who describe their Power Stunts as injurious or exhausting not take levels of Wounds or Fatigue? Because they spent a Benny to do the cool thing - a Benny is the system-designated price of Cool Stuff, so adding additional costs to that Cool Stuff is acting like a jerk and discouraging Cool Stuff. That makes the game less fun, which makes the game worse since fun is the entire point.

If a player character without bennies wanted to do a Power Stunt and was willing to incur a Wound or Fatigue level in compensation then I would probably make the table ruling to let it happen. It sounds like it's going to be a cool scene, which should be fun and fun is the goal of gaming, and the Fatigue / Wound would be a real price that should prevent any of the players from feeling like I was showing favoritism and giving out free stuff to only one person.

What I oppose, vocally, is tying that to Super Power Points. That idea smacks of making players spend extremely limited character resources to use a mechanic they should already be able to use.


Then I wasn't clear.
In a game where Power Stunts exist (which means a game using the SPC), a power modifier that inflicts Wounds / Fatigue with each use of the power is a mechanic that punishes players for trying to do cool things, thereby making the game less fun for everyone. Which is bad.
If a campaign wanted to use a Setting Rule where Power Stunts could be paid for with Fatigue or Wounds, in lieu of a Benny, then that could be a fun Setting Rule. Which I said.
If the revised SPC includes an addition to the Power Stunt rules where characters without Bennies can take a Fatigue or Wound level to perform a Power Stunt then I will probably praise that as a good and positive addition to the rules.

But a mechanic that, functionally, requires spending Super Power Points solely to unlock a single power stunt is a bad mechanic. Which is what I tried to say.

Okay, thank you for clarifying your position. But I think I'm getting hung up on the notion that this 'requires' a player to do anything. Adding one Modifier to the Universal list doesn't in any way force a player to select that Modifier when building their character.

Wait! I think I may see the disconnect. This is being proposed as a negative Modifier--so a -2 or -4 to the total point-cost of the Power, thereby allowing the player to spend more Points on increasing its overall oomph. So the Modifier isn't requiring anyone to spend Super Power Points; it's letting them gain extra Super Power Points in exchange for a drawback.

The character Andy McGee from the Stephen King novel, Firestarter. He has Mind Control, with very much this effect, in that he takes Fatigue every time he uses it.. Going back-to-back with his Power pretty much Incapacitates him several times in the course of the novel. (It just occurred to me that several of King's novels are, essentially, horror/superhero mashups.)

[ChoTimberwolf]

Thank you two for your contribution. Valhalla I know understand your points and partially agree with them. Most use cases I can think off would work best with Power Stunt and a setting rule that allows to pay for the power stunt with a wound or fatigue level instead of a benny.
I still would offer the modifiers for players that really want to have that every time but would advice them against it.

So even if it won't be in the core rules I will at least add this setting rule to nearly all my super hero games.

[enmel]

Pag 48 Special universal modifier has examples of how to handle It. But like ValhallaGH point. Power Stunt push fit better so your Power set could have a clause to led you use power stunt Push for a wound

[enmel]

Digging a little deeper. This approach avoids having to take two versions of the power (with wound and without wound) but would be a benefit of perhaps + 1 / + 2

As you commented above. If the player insists that the only way to use power is by self-harm, your approach is correct.

I'm pretty bad at math, sorry

[ChoTimberwolf]

As i said in my last comment I come to prefer power stunts with the setting rule but I wouldnt forbid my players taking these modifiers. For example that resurrection incaptitates the person doing it would feel appropriate in a low power setting etc

[enmel]

If a campaign wanted to use a Setting Rule where Power Stunts could be paid for with Fatigue or Wounds, in lieu of a Benny, then that could be a fun Setting Rule. Which I said.
If the revised SPC includes an addition to the Power Stunt rules where characters without Bennies can take a Fatigue or Wound level to perform a Power Stunt then I will probably praise that as a good and positive addition to the rules.

You have Blaze of glory for that imo.

if you are truly desperate you can "sacrifice" to get conviction immediately. And choose an option that does not mean death. If not a permanent injury. Naruto's Rock Lee sensei in last battle vs Madara. All Might vs All for One. Deku arms injurys ... All said, maybe giving a few extra bennies to the player who chooses that option would not be bad either.

[ValhallaGH]

Blaze of Glory is rather final. It's not just "this hurts me", it is "this kills me" ... for at least a few story arcs. That's a significant degree of difference with the OP.

[Doctor Crunch]

I feel like I'd handle One For All as an edge? Maybe "Before activating a power the character can choose to take one or more wounds. For each wound taken the character gains +2 to activation and damage rolls for the rest of the round. Wounds are applied at the end of the players round and can be soaked at that time but cannot be reduced below one wound taken."

Maybe with a related hindrance? Something like - Too Much Power (Major) - The character's powers exceed their capacity to control or channel. choose one power. This can only be taken for a power that deals damage. This power receives the benefits of "The Best There Is" edge, but any damage inflicted is also inflicted to the character."