1
\$\begingroup\$

Was wondering how grammatically correct/RAW this interpretation of Triggered is (disregarding rule 0), since this take on it is certainly not RAI but given how dynamic action economy becomes by using it this way it feels weirdly fitting.

What is a Install?

Installs are a type of move originating in fighting games that either give you new moves and/or enhance existing moves for a duration. Anime has a lot of super forms and Dark Souls has second phases. These are reminiscent of those but are free of the limits having Enhanced Trait often has due to PL limits. Here's a example:

Dempsey Roll Strength-Based Damage "8" (Multiattack, Triggered 8: When you hit a Close Attack, Improved Critical 4, Variable Descriptor 1: Wind)

Descriptor: Unarmed, Wind (You weave, the wind curling around you as it makes way for a perpetual motion of strange shape, the sound of a jet engine roars as those around you she your weave gets faster and faster...for a moment you doubt, but the wind gives you confidence, the spirits lying within it cheering you on. Your opponent is confused, he goes all out making a hasty strike, leaving themselves open for a flurry of fists as your weave gains its true shape, your motion that of infinity, and your foe is struck down by a flurry of blows.)

Triggered 8 by my reading of "A Triggered effect is good for one use per rank in this modifier. After its last activation, it stops working." is that it gives you 8 activations per action used to set it up, as a result of the book given definition of effects not being the same as powers, with effects simply stating "an aspect of a power with a particular defined game effect" (pg. 308), specifically not the "one or more effects with various descriptors defining the power's nature" (pg. 309).

Some may say "When you hit a Close Attack" is too general of a trigger, but the idea here is that several of these have been made for different types of playstyles. Here's some samples that I've been testing:

Brawler. When you hit a Close Attack. (As seen above, grappler and rogue esc characters tend to like this one)

Sorcerer. When you miss a Ranged Attack. (Add Homing and Trade Off Accuracy for Damage, Multiattack, and Variable Descriptor for a display of vibrant arcane never before seen)

Berserker. When you are damaged. (Side Effect: Damage, Feedback, and such can all trigger this. Add Regeneration 20 with some kind of source to be made practical)

Rogue. When you successfully Dodge or Parry an attack. (Typically used on Horizontal Leaping or Teleport to move outside of turn, then use Concealment and Subtle/Insidious Afflictions as the fight progresses to get a better surprise attack later on)

Druid. When another character ends their turn within your Environment. (pg. 159) (Usually with Ranged Indirect stuff, Creates, and Summons, where you make a entire forest to fight against opponents within. Usually more practical for villains)

Clarification: Why do I use this ruling currently?

I'm a GM that likes emergent gameplay and seeing how crazy games can get (I was the one that made the Wavejumping tech for D&D afterall), I came to M&M because there's a lot more here than there is in D&D to play with in that regard. Having playstyles available to players in this way makes for more ways of expressing who your character is through game mechanics, and allows characters to feel very different from each other simply from how they fight even when characters can break the sound barrier every turn. Also as a result of the sheer amount of action economy available to characters that have Triggered, observing how your opponent's works to try to avoid it or finding it through use of sensors and countering it gives more ways for players to think about how to solve problems as they work together to overcome walking disasters created from such a mechanic.

This does increase lethality, but given the existence of Regeneration and Healing and how trivial some combats can be this felt better than the usual gameplay in that if you are not careful you can be screwed, though I did test the mechanic with lore given pseudo-immortality to players as to not screw players over too much.

\$\endgroup\$
11
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ This is asking for opinions, so I'm voting to close it as opinion-based. (This site doesn't handle opinion-based questions very well, because one option cannot be objectively more correct than another. This breaks the voting system that our site depends on in order to ensure the good answers float to the top.) \$\endgroup\$
    – GMJoe
    Mar 21 at 8:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ Changed the nature of the question to make sure it better fit the website, making it about how "RAW" the take is given that's my usual question format. Hopefully this doesn't get 2 more Closes before people read the change, given I feel the topic is interesting enough to warrant discussion. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 21 at 9:28
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @FriendlyNeighborhoodChicken: Even with the changes, it looks like a sentence or two of this is asking if this is a valid interpretation of Triggered, and the rest is an invitation to discussing it. Is that indeed your mechanical question, whether this is a valid Triggered setup, including the choice of what to react to? \$\endgroup\$ Mar 21 at 15:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ If the question is purely about the mechanical aspects, there's probably an answer to be had for how to build "not really an object that can be disarmed/disabled/bypassed" as per the rules for Triggered. The Gadget Guides: Traps supplement offers some additional Triggered options, but it still assumes that this is something that can be detected and disabled. Lastly, the new Valiant game is apparently offering something like this although the official book isn't out yet, and the Quick Start indicates that you get only one Reaction action per turn. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 21 at 15:23
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ It's not quite clear to me what you're asking, is it just "is this interpretation of the rules reasonable by RAW"? Is it "will interpreting the rules this way break the game"? \$\endgroup\$
    – Oblivious Sage
    Mar 22 at 13:07

1 Answer 1

1
\$\begingroup\$

From a Rules as Written perspective, this is mostly valid. While Triggered is written largely to emulate things like tripwires and timed explosions, there's nothing specifically preventing it from being something more abstract like a "stance", a "magic sigil", or a "prepared spell contingency". It simply has to be detectable and disarmable, and the circumstances under which it goes off must be detectable by the character. Gadget Guides: Traps added some additional options including bypassing Triggered effects, but that's secondary canon, and probably not all that applicable here.

Where I would disagree with your interpretation (although it's still not strictly non-rules compliant) is the idea of being able to trigger the effect multiple times in a round. Elsewhere, such as in Homing, it is made clear that an attack only gets to apply once per round. Back in the second edition days, Steve Kenson occasionally provided clarification to ambiguous rules, and he specifically noted that Homing effects could only hit once per round for a given target, even if there's a pending missed projectile, and an attack on that turn. Allowing Triggered to keep triggering over and over would seem to violate that guideline, and feels a bit like arguing that an Energy Aura should keep shocking an opponent indefinitely since "the condition of touching the enemy hasn't stopped yet this round". That said, there's nothing specifically in the rules limiting the number of Reaction or Triggered effects that can go off in a round (the Quickstart for the upcoming Valiant Adventures book does limit you to one Reaction per round, but that book has specific rule exceptions), so if you want to interpret the situation as allowing Triggered to go off multiple times in a round, Rule 0 has you covered that you can set the rules however you wish to make your game fun.

\$\endgroup\$
6
  • \$\begingroup\$ As a side note the rules don't technically prevent a Triggered Effect from simply being used as it's one of the Extras that has language indicating use of the Modifier is optional, so keep in mind that some players may argue that their "only applies in specific circumstances" Triggered effect can be used at will with the relevant action. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 26 at 12:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ On the optional bit yeah people often use the action manually, where some even use Unreliable 5/5 uses to essentially limit it so that it's only practical to use the power on its Triggered timing, since it only counts the initial action used to set it as something used by you whereas the Trigger goes off all on its own as long as the thing triggering it is perceived. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 26 at 17:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ As for Homing, that ruling reminds me of Secondary Effect, which does exist but you've always been able to Extra Effort, Summon, or just using a different attack on the same turn something homes in, and use other effects to attack a single target multiple times. Was it meant to just be from extras or was this supposed to be a more general rule? \$\endgroup\$ Mar 26 at 17:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ My impression had always been that it was a general rule to try to limit attempts to break the action economy, the same reason they've stated for not allowing things like Speed/Quickness to grant additional attacks. Not that it stops people, especially if they came from something like D&D where it's standard to increase your offensive power by being able to attack more than the other person. FWIW, 1E M&M had extra actions, although I recall it being limited to two Extras that were basically an early version of Multiattack, brought in via the d20 underpinnings. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 26 at 17:51
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Also thank you for editing the post I probably should've looked over it more in my last edit. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 26 at 23:08

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .