6
\$\begingroup\$

I'm attempting to make a defensive-based character for M&M 3E. The Deflect effect isn't what I'm looking for, so I turned to Create.

If I were to get Move Action Continuous Create (Create, with Reaction, two ranks of Increased Action, and Continuous), can it be used twice per turn, by taking a Standard Action to do it a second time? So that I could, for instance, block both sides of a corridor, or create two "layers" of a defensive bubble surrounding myself and my allies, on a single turn?

\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

Sort of. You can use it twice per turn as a Move action, without question.

Whether or not activating the power a second time "dismisses" your previous use is unclear. You'll need to discuss that with your GM.
Permanent Create does stick around but then you can't remove it.


Given your goal: Don't overlook Ranged, Affects Others, Protection. It's an excellent way to protect a vulnerable ally.
You may need to work out a custom modifier to let it provide a Circumstance bonus to allies' Toughness checks in normal circumstances, but it's worth discussing with your GM.

\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

Use of Reaction and Increased Action to change from Standard to Reaction is on spotty legal grounds

First off, one of the changes from 3E to 2E was to explicitly remove the route of just adjusting combat actions up and down. It was not a change without controversies, and you can see that they were still fine-tuning it when DC Adventures released with them still present, and they were removed by the time of the M&M Heroes Handbook, but nevertheless, there's clear signal that they were trying to get rid of people getting "extra actions" by reducing the action cost.

And yes, the setup you mention does seem to show up in the book with both Reaction as an Extra, and Increased Action as a Flaw, existing. However, Reaction can only be applied canonically to either Free or Standard action as either +1 or +3 (and yes, Power Profiles introduced cases of applying it to Move actions, but that's canonically a set of optional houserules), and my argument is that the mention of Increased Action of Reaction should have just been to convert a Reaction Power back to its original Action, something as easy as removing Reaction from the power.

That said, Rule 0 is present

If your GM is fine with this, cool. Have fun. If you are the GM, be aware that your players are going to try to pull similar shenanigans, so be ready for that.

\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.