Power stunting

[wyrmraker]

If a player uses a power to do something on a regular basis that the power is not described as doing in the initial writeup, such as flying, it becomes more than just a stunt at that point. Making a character have it as an additional power makes sense in that instance and it keeps the player from continually adding more and more abilities to a power that it is not written as having the ability to do.

Except that they've learned how to use the power for that which is why they're managing it, rather than being artificially kept from ever learning how to do anything new with it even when such things should be possible to learn to do. Which is why it's not adding an additional power it's adding an additional use to an existing power.

And then we are back to the "and thus you can learn an unlimited array of super powers" can of worms......

No actually we aren't and never were. They aren't powers for one and short of an actual omni-power you aren't positioned to learn an unlimited amount of tricks from any power. You're strawmanning it with that characterization in order to demonize the idea of allowing someone to learn legitimate alternative uses for a power and push the idea that they shouldn't be able to do anything new or different with it no matter how justified.

No I am not strawmaning it. I am not demonizing an idea, and I am not against people doing legitimate things nor am I against new or different things. (I also find those insinuations extremely personally insulting and will be reporting them as the personal slurs that they are.)

In the only example that keeps being covered the character that learns how to fly around by riding on a rock hasn't developed the power of flight, the power of Wingless Flight is far superior both in speed and in bonuses all the character riding the rock has is the basic ability to get around by riding on the rock to fake it since he can't actually fly as per the power. He likely also has to give up an attack/action each melee because he has to keep some of his concentration on the rock as long as he's trying to remain in the air on it.

Welcome to the world of strawmen thank you. YOU are now saying that because you get to define the exact nature of how the stunt will work for every one everywhere, that it is obviously not a flight power. I counter with "you are flying. Thus you have the power of flight" Not to mention that no one has had any discussion about what (if any) bonuses will accrue from this flight. NOR do all forms of flight have the same bonuses. Not all Minor powers are created equal after all. But if you can learn a power (in this case flight) then yes, you have learned how to do a new super power. MY argument is that this is a slippery slope. The argument that "Well we are just talking about one power here, flight, so its fine" is a strawman. We are not talking about just one power, we are talking about the ability to learn to do ANY power you can think of that you can connect in ANY way to your power. Rocks fly? Sure. Fire makes ice? Sure. Super speed controls time? Bring it. The simple fact here is that we are not discussing the singular ability of 'can I learn to fly with Control Elemental Forces Earth", but instead can I learn to gain more powers from the ones I have. Powers that I can then call upon when ever, and where ever I want (which is the definition of 'new super powers'). THAT is what I have a problem with. The ability for people to gain new super powers, in this particular game system, because its not set up to handle it. It breaks the system because it can, as I have repeatedly pointed out, result in people with dozens of minor powers. And THAT is not exactly fair to the other people, or are you proposing that I can learn to 'stunt' weapons, and spells, and psionics, and bionics, and......
At that point your not talking about a new mechanic....your talking about totally rewriting the rules to the point where we are no longer talking about Palladium at all.

While I understand your points, and they are excellent points concerning the acquiring of new powers versus the devolping of powers via 'stunts', I would like to make a point concerning the final sentence you made.

Should we be so accepting of a system that is clearly so unbabalnced? A system that is so far away from it's core setup (Fantasy setting) that it's mechanics no longer function in any capacity close to logical sense? Or should it indeed be rewritten, beginning to end, with the properly applied focus on the style of roleplay (Modern-era high-powered cinematic heroism) that it's meant to emulate?

[eliakon]

.....At that point your not talking about a new mechanic....your talking about totally rewriting the rules to the point where we are no longer talking about Palladium at all.

While I understand your points, and they are excellent points concerning the acquiring of new powers versus the devolping of powers via 'stunts', I would like to make a point concerning the final sentence you made.

Should we be so accepting of a system that is clearly so unbabalnced? A system that is so far away from it's core setup (Fantasy setting) that it's mechanics no longer function in any capacity close to logical sense? Or should it indeed be rewritten, beginning to end, with the properly applied focus on the style of roleplay (Modern-era high-powered cinematic heroism) that it's meant to emulate?

I would say that the rules do work acceptably well to play in the modern world. They may not be perfect, but they do work. The statement that they "no longer function in any capacity close to logical sense" therefor would be a personal opinion that you find the rules to not work. As would your opinion that HU is supposed to be "Modern-era high-powered cinematic heroism". If you find that you can not make the rules work for what you want to do, then don't play the game. But the argument that "the rules don't work for me, there for the rules don't work at all" is false. It also leads to the false conclusion "therefore we must rewrite the rules to work" (which is false since the rules currently DO work). And the result there tends to be "Therefore my personal homebrew rewrite is the only proper way of doing things."
Would I be interested in some sort of V2.0 of the palladium system that was rewritten from the ground up, that was designed, from the outset, to integrate technology, magic, super powers, psionics, and martial arts? Sure. Do I think such a thing will ever happen? No. But I do not dismiss what I have NOW because there is a theoretical 'perfect' solution out there. (Nirvana fallacy)
Now if there IS a re-write of the game, then I will discuss it. But until that time, such falls so far into 'personal house rules' as to be beyond any form of discussion. That's not 'should this mechanic or that mechanic be modeled' but "should we even be playing this game at all"

[Stone Gargoyle]

If a player uses a power to do something on a regular basis that the power is not described as doing in the initial writeup, such as flying, it becomes more than just a stunt at that point. Making a character have it as an additional power makes sense in that instance and it keeps the player from continually adding more and more abilities to a power that it is not written as having the ability to do.

Except that they've learned how to use the power for that which is why they're managing it, rather than being artificially kept from ever learning how to do anything new with it even when such things should be possible to learn to do. Which is why it's not adding an additional power it's adding an additional use to an existing power.

And then we are back to the "and thus you can learn an unlimited array of super powers" can of worms......

Exactly. Why should I take a major when I can take a minor power such as EE Fire and use it to emulate such powers and Flight: Energy, energy weapon and other fire and ice powers? At some point, the GM should either disallow such uses or allow them by making them cost something.

[wyrmraker]

.....At that point your not talking about a new mechanic....your talking about totally rewriting the rules to the point where we are no longer talking about Palladium at all.

While I understand your points, and they are excellent points concerning the acquiring of new powers versus the devolping of powers via 'stunts', I would like to make a point concerning the final sentence you made.

Should we be so accepting of a system that is clearly so unbabalnced? A system that is so far away from it's core setup (Fantasy setting) that it's mechanics no longer function in any capacity close to logical sense? Or should it indeed be rewritten, beginning to end, with the properly applied focus on the style of roleplay (Modern-era high-powered cinematic heroism) that it's meant to emulate?

I would say that the rules do work acceptably well to play in the modern world. They may not be perfect, but they do work. The statement that they "no longer function in any capacity close to logical sense" therefor would be a personal opinion that you find the rules to not work. As would your opinion that HU is supposed to be "Modern-era high-powered cinematic heroism". If you find that you can not make the rules work for what you want to do, then don't play the game. But the argument that "the rules don't work for me, there for the rules don't work at all" is false. It also leads to the false conclusion "therefore we must rewrite the rules to work" (which is false since the rules currently DO work). And the result there tends to be "Therefore my personal homebrew rewrite is the only proper way of doing things."
Would I be interested in some sort of V2.0 of the palladium system that was rewritten from the ground up, that was designed, from the outset, to integrate technology, magic, super powers, psionics, and martial arts? Sure. Do I think such a thing will ever happen? No. But I do not dismiss what I have NOW because there is a theoretical 'perfect' solution out there. (Nirvana fallacy)
Now if there IS a re-write of the game, then I will discuss it. But until that time, such falls so far into 'personal house rules' as to be beyond any form of discussion. That's not 'should this mechanic or that mechanic be modeled' but "should we even be playing this game at all"

Unfortunately, I'm still going to have to disagree with you about the system itself. It was originally designed to emulate the Swords And Sorcery genre, which it does extremely well. Modern methods set in the system fall apart.

Guns? As a gunsmith, I am extremely aware of how firearms function. The Palladium system? It runs at odds with the facts. Also, a guy with 9 PP and a guy with 19 PP, both with WP Automatic Pistol, should not have the exact same chance of hitting their targets. It may be a 'balance issue', but I am extremely well aware that balance is a non-issue in most of the Palladium lineup.

Hand to Hand combat? I have observed trained boxers rain 15 full strength blows on a person inside of 15 seconds in the ring. The Palladium system claims that someone with that training can't make anywhere near that.

Skill progression? It may be a matter of expedience, but if I am not using a skill, why is that skill still improving? If I have a character who solves almost all of his problems with non-violent means, should my hand-to-hand skills raise in level? Of course not, but yet they do.


Lastly, I have something on the thread issue itself. Speaking of 'Power Stunts' there might be a way to house-rule it. In Rifts, Telemechanics is a required pre-requisite for Telemechanic Mental Operation and Telemechanic Shutdown. So why not have a custom rule allowing some powers to be taken either seperately from the beginning, or over time using certain powers as prerequisites?

[eliakon]

.....At that point your not talking about a new mechanic....your talking about totally rewriting the rules to the point where we are no longer talking about Palladium at all.

While I understand your points, and they are excellent points concerning the acquiring of new powers versus the devolping of powers via 'stunts', I would like to make a point concerning the final sentence you made.

Should we be so accepting of a system that is clearly so unbabalnced? A system that is so far away from it's core setup (Fantasy setting) that it's mechanics no longer function in any capacity close to logical sense? Or should it indeed be rewritten, beginning to end, with the properly applied focus on the style of roleplay (Modern-era high-powered cinematic heroism) that it's meant to emulate?

I would say that the rules do work acceptably well to play in the modern world. They may not be perfect, but they do work. The statement that they "no longer function in any capacity close to logical sense" therefor would be a personal opinion that you find the rules to not work. As would your opinion that HU is supposed to be "Modern-era high-powered cinematic heroism". If you find that you can not make the rules work for what you want to do, then don't play the game. But the argument that "the rules don't work for me, there for the rules don't work at all" is false. It also leads to the false conclusion "therefore we must rewrite the rules to work" (which is false since the rules currently DO work). And the result there tends to be "Therefore my personal homebrew rewrite is the only proper way of doing things."
Would I be interested in some sort of V2.0 of the palladium system that was rewritten from the ground up, that was designed, from the outset, to integrate technology, magic, super powers, psionics, and martial arts? Sure. Do I think such a thing will ever happen? No. But I do not dismiss what I have NOW because there is a theoretical 'perfect' solution out there. (Nirvana fallacy)
Now if there IS a re-write of the game, then I will discuss it. But until that time, such falls so far into 'personal house rules' as to be beyond any form of discussion. That's not 'should this mechanic or that mechanic be modeled' but "should we even be playing this game at all"

Unfortunately, I'm still going to have to disagree with you about the system itself. It was originally designed to emulate the Swords And Sorcery genre, which it does extremely well. Modern methods set in the system fall apart.

I would beg to differ. If it replicates 'swords and sorcery' well....

Guns? As a gunsmith, I am extremely aware of how firearms function. The Palladium system? It runs at odds with the facts.

... the unreality of its guns is just as unreal as its arrows and swords and shields....

Also, a guy with 9 PP and a guy with 19 PP, both with WP Automatic Pistol, should not have the exact same chance of hitting their targets. It may be a 'balance issue', but I am extremely well aware that balance is a non-issue in most of the Palladium lineup.

Okay, I can buy that maybe PP should be added to guns

Hand to Hand combat? I have observed trained boxers rain 15 full strength blows on a person inside of 15 seconds in the ring. The Palladium system claims that someone with that training can't make anywhere near that.

I thought you just said that you thought it emulated swords and sorcery well? Now your saying that it doesn't actually do the 'swords part' at all...

Skill progression? It may be a matter of expedience, but if I am not using a skill, why is that skill still improving? If I have a character who solves almost all of his problems with non-violent means, should my hand-to-hand skills raise in level? Of course not, but yet they do.

Yes, welcome to the world of levels. This is the same issue that every level based game every where has, and with out replacing the core game system with a level less build you cant avoid it....


This sounds like your saying that you don't actually think the game should be played then. You think that its hand to hand is broken (except strangely in PF, where the oddities are MOST obvious usually) That you don't want levels, that you don't want the damage/defense system..... In other words you would prefer a different game. That's fine...but discussions about THIS game can't really be based on "this game is bad, so we will replace it with a completely different game that *I* like and then we will talk about that game".


Lastly, I have something on the thread issue itself. Speaking of 'Power Stunts' there might be a way to house-rule it. In Rifts, Telemechanics is a required pre-requisite for Telemechanic Mental Operation and Telemechanic Shutdown. So why not have a custom rule allowing some powers to be taken either seperately from the beginning, or over time using certain powers as prerequisites?[/quote]

[Nightmask]

If a player uses a power to do something on a regular basis that the power is not described as doing in the initial writeup, such as flying, it becomes more than just a stunt at that point. Making a character have it as an additional power makes sense in that instance and it keeps the player from continually adding more and more abilities to a power that it is not written as having the ability to do.

Except that they've learned how to use the power for that which is why they're managing it, rather than being artificially kept from ever learning how to do anything new with it even when such things should be possible to learn to do. Which is why it's not adding an additional power it's adding an additional use to an existing power.

And then we are back to the "and thus you can learn an unlimited array of super powers" can of worms......

No actually we aren't and never were. They aren't powers for one and short of an actual omni-power you aren't positioned to learn an unlimited amount of tricks from any power. You're strawmanning it with that characterization in order to demonize the idea of allowing someone to learn legitimate alternative uses for a power and push the idea that they shouldn't be able to do anything new or different with it no matter how justified.

No I am not strawmaning it. I am not demonizing an idea, and I am not against people doing legitimate things nor am I against new or different things. (I also find those insinuations extremely personally insulting and will be reporting them as the personal slurs that they are.)

You tossed out an overly broad and unrealistic idea that someone would be able to develop an unlimited array of super-powers from a single power which is a strawman meant to demonize the idea by attaching it to something that isn't possible and you know people take issue with.

In the only example that keeps being covered the character that learns how to fly around by riding on a rock hasn't developed the power of flight, the power of Wingless Flight is far superior both in speed and in bonuses all the character riding the rock has is the basic ability to get around by riding on the rock to fake it since he can't actually fly as per the power. He likely also has to give up an attack/action each melee because he has to keep some of his concentration on the rock as long as he's trying to remain in the air on it.

Welcome to the world of strawmen thank you. YOU are now saying that because you get to define the exact nature of how the stunt will work for every one everywhere, that it is obviously not a flight power. I counter with "you are flying. Thus you have the power of flight" Not to mention that no one has had any discussion about what (if any) bonuses will accrue from this flight. NOR do all forms of flight have the same bonuses. Not all Minor powers are created equal after all. But if you can learn a power (in this case flight) then yes, you have learned how to do a new super power. MY argument is that this is a slippery slope. The argument that "Well we are just talking about one power here, flight, so its fine" is a strawman. We are not talking about just one power, we are talking about the ability to learn to do ANY power you can think of that you can connect in ANY way to your power. Rocks fly? Sure. Fire makes ice? Sure. Super speed controls time? Bring it. The simple fact here is that we are not discussing the singular ability of 'can I learn to fly with Control Elemental Forces Earth", but instead can I learn to gain more powers from the ones I have. Powers that I can then call upon when ever, and where ever I want (which is the definition of 'new super powers'). THAT is what I have a problem with. The ability for people to gain new super powers, in this particular game system, because its not set up to handle it. It breaks the system because it can, as I have repeatedly pointed out, result in people with dozens of minor powers. And THAT is not exactly fair to the other people, or are you proposing that I can learn to 'stunt' weapons, and spells, and psionics, and bionics, and......
At that point your not talking about a new mechanic....your talking about totally rewriting the rules to the point where we are no longer talking about Palladium at all.

There's nothing of the strawman about my point, I addressed a specific example others brought up and nothing the strawman about it. The game has a specific set of flight powers of which none of them would be what the character would gain if it developed flight by moving about on a rock therefor they haven't developed a what the game lists as a flight power they instead would have developed a weaker and much more limited means of flight which is completely in keeping with the concept. But you're certainly strawmanning my position (which if you honestly did consider a slur you certainly shouldn't be tossing it around at other people, best report yourself while you're at it), and having no problems trying to insist that the only way to look at things is your way and how flight is clearly how you define it and any new uses you developed for a power just have to be considered powers instead of simply aspects of that that particular power just like most powers have a range of minor things they do (like Extraordinary PE giving minor powers of extra SDC, extra HP, bonus HP as you level, and so on). Developing what amounts to a power stunt is just adding another sub-feature like that to a power, which in the end what features it provided would be decided by the GM.

[Nightmask]

If a player uses a power to do something on a regular basis that the power is not described as doing in the initial writeup, such as flying, it becomes more than just a stunt at that point. Making a character have it as an additional power makes sense in that instance and it keeps the player from continually adding more and more abilities to a power that it is not written as having the ability to do.

Except that they've learned how to use the power for that which is why they're managing it, rather than being artificially kept from ever learning how to do anything new with it even when such things should be possible to learn to do. Which is why it's not adding an additional power it's adding an additional use to an existing power.

And then we are back to the "and thus you can learn an unlimited array of super powers" can of worms......

Exactly. Why should I take a major when I can take a minor power such as EE Fire and use it to emulate such powers and Flight: Energy, energy weapon and other fire and ice powers? At some point, the GM should either disallow such uses or allow them by making them cost something.

I don't think anyone's suggested they shouldn't have some kind of cost to develop, indeed I think the original question was regarding how one would go about allowing them as much as allowing them in general. But what power you start with is going to determine just how much you can potentially do, Energy Expulsion: Fire isn't something I'd see letting you generate ice, shape your fire into a sword or just maybe a limited form of flight but the power would be taken beyond its limits as a minor power about expelling energy to have it absorbing energy. The Human Torch can create ice because he has a range of fire control powers as well as generation and can draw in heat due to those control powers which the ability to simply generate fire doesn't have and one couldn't develop under the circumstances. But in the end it would be up to the GM to decide if he were willing to let someone take that power and let you develop it into its polar opposite at the same time.

[Severus Snape]

This is one of the reasons I love the Marvel FASERIP system. You are allowed to dream up stunts that make sense based on your powers, and then you have to work to make them work. And this is done (albeit summarized) as such:

1. You spend 100 karma.
2. You roll a d100.
3. If the roll succeeds, you pull off the stunt...but it's not yet permanent.
4. If the roll fails, the stunt fails.
5. Once you have succeeded 10 times - meaning you have spent no less than 1000 karma at this point - the stunt becomes a permanent part of your repertoire that you can pull off any time.

I like the idea of making players have to work at getting something cool like a power stunt. The only problem with HU is that characters get XP that goes towards them advancing in level. Forcing characters to spend XP will keep them from ever getting to 2nd or 3rd or 26th level or what have you. But the GM in me would allow that (spending XP) to happen to get power stunts, provided the expenditure does not drop them below the needed amount to be at the level they are currently at AND it does not drop them below 0 XP.

Actually, that's not a bad idea now that I think on it. It makes players have to think a bit. "I'm 50 XP away from 5th level, but I'm working on this power stunt. Do I spend the 100 XP and hope I succeed, or do I go to 5th level and wait a bit to pull this off again?".

[Nightmask]

This is one of the reasons I love the Marvel FASERIP system. You are allowed to dream up stunts that make sense based on your powers, and then you have to work to make them work. And this is done (albeit summarized) as such:

1. You spend 100 karma.
2. You roll a d100.
3. If the roll succeeds, you pull off the stunt...but it's not yet permanent.
4. If the roll fails, the stunt fails.
5. Once you have succeeded 10 times - meaning you have spent no less than 1000 karma at this point - the stunt becomes a permanent part of your repertoire that you can pull off any time.

My only quibble with this is technical, you don't have to succeed 10 times to consider it learned, you simply have to put in 10 tries at it since succeed or fail you're learning until after the 10th time you've worked out all the bugs.

I like the idea of making players have to work at getting something cool like a power stunt. The only problem with HU is that characters get XP that goes towards them advancing in level. Forcing characters to spend XP will keep them from ever getting to 2nd or 3rd or 26th level or what have you. But the GM in me would allow that (spending XP) to happen to get power stunts, provided the expenditure does not drop them below the needed amount to be at the level they are currently at AND it does not drop them below 0 XP.

Actually, that's not a bad idea now that I think on it. It makes players have to think a bit. "I'm 50 XP away from 5th level, but I'm working on this power stunt. Do I spend the 100 XP and hope I succeed, or do I go to 5th level and wait a bit to pull this off again?".

Much like with the Marvel game this would be a question of how available are those experience points, and unlike Marvel you'd get quite a bit of level disparity between the guy who puts it all into level advancement vs the guy who puts most of it into stunt development (if they're available). It's not much of a problem in Marvel since there is no level advancement per-say but more difficult to have them spending experience on developing new power stunts (which would be more like someone learning a new skill). Not an insurmountable problem to work out though.

[Severus Snape]

My only quibble with this is technical, you don't have to succeed 10 times to consider it learned, you simply have to put in 10 tries at it since succeed or fail you're learning until after the 10th time you've worked out all the bugs.

You are correct; I remember the rule wrong. I re-read it, and you merely need to try it 10 times. Still, you have to spend 1000 karma before you know it.

Much like with the Marvel game this would be a question of how available are those experience points, and unlike Marvel you'd get quite a bit of level disparity between the guy who puts it all into level advancement vs the guy who puts most of it into stunt development (if they're available). It's not much of a problem in Marvel since there is no level advancement per-say but more difficult to have them spending experience on developing new power stunts (which would be more like someone learning a new skill). Not an insurmountable problem to work out though.

Same thing in Marvel as it would be here. Marvel may not have a level-up mechanic, but you still have to decide if you want to save/spend that Karma on Power Stunts, picking up new powers, jacking Attributes, picking up new Talents, etc. It's the same base premise: Do you save the XP and level up to get more bonuses and abilities, or do you focus on your powers?

[eliakon]

So now we are suggesting that you be allowed to spend XP to buy new super powers? Can psions buy new psionics (sorry, psi-stunts). How about mages figure out new spells with out having to spend months (or years) of time out of play doing research? Can Borgs figure out cool new tricks that they can do with their abilities (and how will these be modeled? you just give them super powers?)
If your going to add a massive amount of versatility and raw power to one segment of the population (super power users) how do you propose to control it so that 1) that segment does not get out of hand and 2) so that the costs are proportional so that stunts cost a proportionate cost to both a level 1 and level 10 character and 3) that the other segments have a fair, equitable access to the 'power ups' Because its NOT fair to say "we are going to rewrite things so that now, one class is privileged above all others"
Preferably with OUT rewriting the rules wholesale (because if the solution is "we scrap the rules and rewrite them" then its not really a discussion about the rules now is it?)

[Nightmask]

My only quibble with this is technical, you don't have to succeed 10 times to consider it learned, you simply have to put in 10 tries at it since succeed or fail you're learning until after the 10th time you've worked out all the bugs.

You are correct; I remember the rule wrong. I re-read it, and you merely need to try it 10 times. Still, you have to spend 1000 karma before you know it.

Which is reasonable, the power stunt method is a bargain over purchasing an entirely new power for 4000k+starting power rank. Plus it's limited to having a power that you can reasonably manage that power stunt from (you aren't going to power stunt Hyper-Leaping from Hyper-Digging after all).

Much like with the Marvel game this would be a question of how available are those experience points, and unlike Marvel you'd get quite a bit of level disparity between the guy who puts it all into level advancement vs the guy who puts most of it into stunt development (if they're available). It's not much of a problem in Marvel since there is no level advancement per-say but more difficult to have them spending experience on developing new power stunts (which would be more like someone learning a new skill). Not an insurmountable problem to work out though.

Same thing in Marvel as it would be here. Marvel may not have a level-up mechanic, but you still have to decide if you want to save/spend that Karma on Power Stunts, picking up new powers, jacking Attributes, picking up new Talents, etc. It's the same base premise: Do you save the XP and level up to get more bonuses and abilities, or do you focus on your powers?

Well the Marvel setting at least is biased against increasing your power ranks, unlike with HU where things like damage (generally) automatically increase as you level up across the board. So your best alternative to expanding on things is power stunts.

[Nightmask]

So now we are suggesting that you be allowed to spend XP to buy new super powers? Can psions buy new psionics (sorry, psi-stunts). How about mages figure out new spells with out having to spend months (or years) of time out of play doing research? Can Borgs figure out cool new tricks that they can do with their abilities (and how will these be modeled? you just give them super powers?)
If your going to add a massive amount of versatility and raw power to one segment of the population (super power users) how do you propose to control it so that 1) that segment does not get out of hand and 2) so that the costs are proportional so that stunts cost a proportionate cost to both a level 1 and level 10 character and 3) that the other segments have a fair, equitable access to the 'power ups' Because its NOT fair to say "we are going to rewrite things so that now, one class is privileged above all others"
Preferably with OUT rewriting the rules wholesale (because if the solution is "we scrap the rules and rewrite them" then its not really a discussion about the rules now is it?)

Again they aren't buying new super-powers, they're expanding the usage range of their existing powers. One suggestion made for how to do that is the expenditure of experience the character has earned to 'buy off' as it were learning this new skill. This does not constitute making 'one class privileged above all others', it constitutes giving one class some more flexibility rather than unfairly limiting it.

There is also no reason that the costs would be proportional across the levels, the level 10 guy shouldn't find himself having it ten times as hard to figure out how to something compared to the level 1 guy. That's like suggesting the newbie pilot is somehow just as good at learning a complicated flight maneuver as the highly experienced pilot, it just doesn't make sense.

Now, instead of simply saying how things can't work how about trying to suggest ways that they COULD work? Because simply insisting how they can't be done isn't helpful in a topic regarding how one might make them work.

[eliakon]

So now we are suggesting that you be allowed to spend XP to buy new super powers? Can psions buy new psionics (sorry, psi-stunts). How about mages figure out new spells with out having to spend months (or years) of time out of play doing research? Can Borgs figure out cool new tricks that they can do with their abilities (and how will these be modeled? you just give them super powers?)
If your going to add a massive amount of versatility and raw power to one segment of the population (super power users) how do you propose to control it so that 1) that segment does not get out of hand and 2) so that the costs are proportional so that stunts cost a proportionate cost to both a level 1 and level 10 character and 3) that the other segments have a fair, equitable access to the 'power ups' Because its NOT fair to say "we are going to rewrite things so that now, one class is privileged above all others"
Preferably with OUT rewriting the rules wholesale (because if the solution is "we scrap the rules and rewrite them" then its not really a discussion about the rules now is it?)

Again they aren't buying new super-powers, they're expanding the usage range of their existing powers.

No, they are buying new powers. In Palladium the power EE: Fire, EE: Explosive Fire Ball, and EE: Fire Ring are three powers, even if your over all theme is fire. Thus if they now have the ability to do something they didn't have the ability to do before, they have a new power. Even if that new power is an aspect of their overall metapower

One suggestion made for how to do that is the expenditure of experience the character has earned to 'buy off' as it were learning this new skill. This does not constitute making 'one class privileged above all others', it constitutes giving one class some more flexibility rather than unfairly limiting it.

First off, there is no mechanic in play right now for spending xp to buy skills.
Second off the phrase 'unfairly limiting it' is highly prejoritive implying that the pro-stunt lobby is some how on the side of justice, and that any one that is against stunts is malevolently trying to unfairly cripple a class.
Third it STILL does not address the issue of how we make it fair to the OTHER classes who cant just say "okay I want to learn a new super power."

There is also no reason that the costs would be proportional across the levels, the level 10 guy shouldn't find himself having it ten times as hard to figure out how to something compared to the level 1 guy. That's like suggesting the newbie pilot is somehow just as good at learning a complicated flight maneuver as the highly experienced pilot, it just doesn't make sense.

Nor is it reasonable to assume that the higher level characters (who presumably earn more XP) should be allowed to gain more super powers faster than lower level characters. Just as it doesn't always logically follow that experts learn as fast as newbies...

Now, instead of simply saying how things can't work how about trying to suggest ways that they COULD work? Because simply insisting how they can't be done isn't helpful in a topic regarding how one might make them work.

Shifting the burden to me to find a solution for your problem is a logical fallacy that I do not choose to fall into. I don't have to come up with a solution, because I do not believe that there IS one. I have stated why I do not believe there is one (it leads to abuse via accumulation of super powers) until someone can provide a mechanic to curb this, to me, inherently fatal flaw, I do not see a reason to work on trying to work out how to implement something that, in my view, can only lead to abuse.

[Nightmask]

So now we are suggesting that you be allowed to spend XP to buy new super powers? Can psions buy new psionics (sorry, psi-stunts). How about mages figure out new spells with out having to spend months (or years) of time out of play doing research? Can Borgs figure out cool new tricks that they can do with their abilities (and how will these be modeled? you just give them super powers?)
If your going to add a massive amount of versatility and raw power to one segment of the population (super power users) how do you propose to control it so that 1) that segment does not get out of hand and 2) so that the costs are proportional so that stunts cost a proportionate cost to both a level 1 and level 10 character and 3) that the other segments have a fair, equitable access to the 'power ups' Because its NOT fair to say "we are going to rewrite things so that now, one class is privileged above all others"
Preferably with OUT rewriting the rules wholesale (because if the solution is "we scrap the rules and rewrite them" then its not really a discussion about the rules now is it?)

Again they aren't buying new super-powers, they're expanding the usage range of their existing powers.

No, they are buying new powers. In Palladium the power EE: Fire, EE: Explosive Fire Ball, and EE: Fire Ring are three powers, even if your over all theme is fire. Thus if they now have the ability to do something they didn't have the ability to do before, they have a new power. Even if that new power is an aspect of their overall metapower

No matter how much you insist on it they aren't gaining a new power they're gaining a sub-ability like many powers have (some of which have more than a dozen sub-abilities which by your argument would mean taking said power they're really taking a dozen powers when no they really aren't).

One suggestion made for how to do that is the expenditure of experience the character has earned to 'buy off' as it were learning this new skill. This does not constitute making 'one class privileged above all others', it constitutes giving one class some more flexibility rather than unfairly limiting it.

First off, there is no mechanic in play right now for spending xp to buy skills.
Second off the phrase 'unfairly limiting it' is highly prejoritive implying that the pro-stunt lobby is some how on the side of justice, and that any one that is against stunts is malevolently trying to unfairly cripple a class.
Third it STILL does not address the issue of how we make it fair to the OTHER classes who cant just say "okay I want to learn a new super power."

There is nothing pejorative about it, certainly less so than referring to those willing to accept the idea as the 'pro-stunt lobby'. There also isn't any issue of fairness because there's nothing unfair about it, the other classes don't require anything to somehow 'balance' it because again there's nothing unfair about supers learning new uses for their existing powers. You don't have to go handing out or contriving perks for the other classes because a super-human can now learn new things for his existing powers (if they have range to allow it) rather than never being able to do anything more than what they started with.

There is also no reason that the costs would be proportional across the levels, the level 10 guy shouldn't find himself having it ten times as hard to figure out how to something compared to the level 1 guy. That's like suggesting the newbie pilot is somehow just as good at learning a complicated flight maneuver as the highly experienced pilot, it just doesn't make sense.

Nor is it reasonable to assume that the higher level characters (who presumably earn more XP) should be allowed to gain more super powers faster than lower level characters. Just as it doesn't always logically follow that experts learn as fast as newbies...

Again, they aren't learning new super-powers. If you're going to keep miss-characterizing them as new super-powers when they aren't we simply can't manage a rational discussion because I simply will not call them what they are not.

Now, instead of simply saying how things can't work how about trying to suggest ways that they COULD work? Because simply insisting how they can't be done isn't helpful in a topic regarding how one might make them work.

Shifting the burden to me to find a solution for your problem is a logical fallacy that I do not choose to fall into. I don't have to come up with a solution, because I do not believe that there IS one. I have stated why I do not believe there is one (it leads to abuse via accumulation of super powers) until someone can provide a mechanic to curb this, to me, inherently fatal flaw, I do not see a reason to work on trying to work out how to implement something that, in my view, can only lead to abuse.

It's not my problem (go look, I didn't start this thread), and if you don't believe there is a solution why are you even bothering with this thread? Responding to nearly every post with 'no that can't possibly work' is not constructive or helpful in the slightest. The fact that you keep labeling them super-powers instead of what they are (new uses for an existing power) seems to be a big aspect of the problem, the skill-laden guy can go back to school and learn new skills and keep becoming more flexible but the guy with a super-power you insist can't ever learn anything new for how to use his power no matter how justified it would be. I guess you're okay though with mages adding more and more powers as they go along without any limit and of course psychics add more powers as they go along too (since you apparently label everything as a power then mages and psychics are adding powers and the mages don't even have to level up to gain new powers they can just go out and learn them just like any other skill).

[eliakon]

So now we are suggesting that you be allowed to spend XP to buy new super powers? Can psions buy new psionics (sorry, psi-stunts). How about mages figure out new spells with out having to spend months (or years) of time out of play doing research? Can Borgs figure out cool new tricks that they can do with their abilities (and how will these be modeled? you just give them super powers?)
If your going to add a massive amount of versatility and raw power to one segment of the population (super power users) how do you propose to control it so that 1) that segment does not get out of hand and 2) so that the costs are proportional so that stunts cost a proportionate cost to both a level 1 and level 10 character and 3) that the other segments have a fair, equitable access to the 'power ups' Because its NOT fair to say "we are going to rewrite things so that now, one class is privileged above all others"
Preferably with OUT rewriting the rules wholesale (because if the solution is "we scrap the rules and rewrite them" then its not really a discussion about the rules now is it?)

Again they aren't buying new super-powers, they're expanding the usage range of their existing powers.

No, they are buying new powers. In Palladium the power EE: Fire, EE: Explosive Fire Ball, and EE: Fire Ring are three powers, even if your over all theme is fire. Thus if they now have the ability to do something they didn't have the ability to do before, they have a new power. Even if that new power is an aspect of their overall metapower

No matter how much you insist on it they aren't gaining a new power they're gaining a sub-ability like many powers have (some of which have more than a dozen sub-abilities which by your argument would mean taking said power they're really taking a dozen powers when no they really aren't).

I guess we are going to have to disagree here. I feel that if something is not part of what you get at the start, and is not something that everyone with the power can do automatically, then its a new power.
Learning to ride flying rocks is not just a sub power of earth power, its flight: earth.

One suggestion made for how to do that is the expenditure of experience the character has earned to 'buy off' as it were learning this new skill. This does not constitute making 'one class privileged above all others', it constitutes giving one class some more flexibility rather than unfairly limiting it.

First off, there is no mechanic in play right now for spending xp to buy skills.
Second off the phrase 'unfairly limiting it' is highly prejoritive implying that the pro-stunt lobby is some how on the side of justice, and that any one that is against stunts is malevolently trying to unfairly cripple a class.
Third it STILL does not address the issue of how we make it fair to the OTHER classes who cant just say "okay I want to learn a new super power."

There is nothing pejorative about it, certainly less so than referring to those willing to accept the idea as the 'pro-stunt lobby'. There also isn't any issue of fairness because there's nothing unfair about it, the other classes don't require anything to somehow 'balance' it because again there's nothing unfair about supers learning new uses for their existing powers. You don't have to go handing out or contriving perks for the other classes because a super-human can now learn new things for his existing powers (if they have range to allow it) rather than never being able to do anything more than what they started with.

It is pejorative when the claim is made that something is "unfairly limiting" people. That is, by the nature of the phrase saying that what is being done is, inherently unfair. Thus it is saying that anyone that is in favor of that is purposefully supporting that unfairness.
And THAT is pejorative.
And I would say that yes, you SHOULD have to allow others to have equal access to the same perk your giving. If your allowing one group to suddenly learn abilities then everyone needs to have that same ability.

There is also no reason that the costs would be proportional across the levels, the level 10 guy shouldn't find himself having it ten times as hard to figure out how to something compared to the level 1 guy. That's like suggesting the newbie pilot is somehow just as good at learning a complicated flight maneuver as the highly experienced pilot, it just doesn't make sense.

Nor is it reasonable to assume that the higher level characters (who presumably earn more XP) should be allowed to gain more super powers faster than lower level characters. Just as it doesn't always logically follow that experts learn as fast as newbies...

Again, they aren't learning new super-powers. If you're going to keep miss-characterizing them as new super-powers when they aren't we simply can't manage a rational discussion because I simply will not call them what they are not.

You can call it a stunt if you want, but in palladium game terms its a power. I am simply calling it what it is mechanically. You may disagree with that characterization, and you obviously do. But I stand by my definition (which I may add, I have supported with evidence beyond 'no it is not")

Now, instead of simply saying how things can't work how about trying to suggest ways that they COULD work? Because simply insisting how they can't be done isn't helpful in a topic regarding how one might make them work.

Shifting the burden to me to find a solution for your problem is a logical fallacy that I do not choose to fall into. I don't have to come up with a solution, because I do not believe that there IS one. I have stated why I do not believe there is one (it leads to abuse via accumulation of super powers) until someone can provide a mechanic to curb this, to me, inherently fatal flaw, I do not see a reason to work on trying to work out how to implement something that, in my view, can only lead to abuse.

It's not my problem (go look, I didn't start this thread), and if you don't believe there is a solution why are you even bothering with this thread? Responding to nearly every post with 'no that can't possibly work' is not constructive or helpful in the slightest. The fact that you keep labeling them super-powers instead of what they are (new uses for an existing power) seems to be a big aspect of the problem, the skill-laden guy can go back to school and learn new skills and keep becoming more flexible but the guy with a super-power you insist can't ever learn anything new for how to use his power no matter how justified it would be. I guess you're okay though with mages adding more and more powers as they go along without any limit and of course psychics add more powers as they go along too (since you apparently label everything as a power then mages and psychics are adding powers and the mages don't even have to level up to gain new powers they can just go out and learn them just like any other skill).

We differ then on what is a super power.
You feel that flying on a rock is a logical use of an earth power.
I feel that its gaining a new power (flight: Earth)
The books mechanics of powers has specific sub powers.
You seem to be claiming that people should simply be allowed to extend those lists indefinitely, and with no restriction other than 'I think it has some connection to the base power or the characters theme'
I feel that if you want to add more powers to something, you are, by definition adding new powers to the game, either new minor powers, or new major powers. It doesn't matter if the 'in universe' explaination is that they are a 'logical out growth of my power' the mechanical definition is that it is not covered by Power X, or Power Y, thus it must be Power Z. This is because you do not require training to use the abilities of Power X, nor of Power Y, and all characters with Power X and Power Y have all powers on sub lists 1 and 2. There fore, if the power is not on sub list 1 it is not part of power X since otherwise everyone else with Power X would have it.

I do not have a problem with a mage adding a new spell if they find the formula for it, and their style of magic allows for them to learn new spells. I do have a problem with a mage just saying "oh, I figured out a new use for my old spell...so I can now cast this spell when ever I want" That is one of the defining characteristics of their class after all. Which they 'pay for' by having to pay PPE for their spells, and having extraordinarily harsh criteria for adding new spells in HU.
Psi's can learn new psionics only in the ways specified by their specific class, thus it is a false analogy to say that a class that has a specific, LIMITED, number of specific choices on level up, is some how co-equal to a system of unlimited, customized, open-ended power acquisition.
The super can learn new uses for his power all he wants, that's fine. But he can not just 'learn' to change the mechanical game function of that power.

[Nightmask]

So now we are suggesting that you be allowed to spend XP to buy new super powers? Can psions buy new psionics (sorry, psi-stunts). How about mages figure out new spells with out having to spend months (or years) of time out of play doing research? Can Borgs figure out cool new tricks that they can do with their abilities (and how will these be modeled? you just give them super powers?)
If your going to add a massive amount of versatility and raw power to one segment of the population (super power users) how do you propose to control it so that 1) that segment does not get out of hand and 2) so that the costs are proportional so that stunts cost a proportionate cost to both a level 1 and level 10 character and 3) that the other segments have a fair, equitable access to the 'power ups' Because its NOT fair to say "we are going to rewrite things so that now, one class is privileged above all others"
Preferably with OUT rewriting the rules wholesale (because if the solution is "we scrap the rules and rewrite them" then its not really a discussion about the rules now is it?)

Again they aren't buying new super-powers, they're expanding the usage range of their existing powers.

No, they are buying new powers. In Palladium the power EE: Fire, EE: Explosive Fire Ball, and EE: Fire Ring are three powers, even if your over all theme is fire. Thus if they now have the ability to do something they didn't have the ability to do before, they have a new power. Even if that new power is an aspect of their overall metapower

No matter how much you insist on it they aren't gaining a new power they're gaining a sub-ability like many powers have (some of which have more than a dozen sub-abilities which by your argument would mean taking said power they're really taking a dozen powers when no they really aren't).

I guess we are going to have to disagree here. I feel that if something is not part of what you get at the start, and is not something that everyone with the power can do automatically, then its a new power.
Learning to ride flying rocks is not just a sub power of earth power, its flight: earth.

If you can make a rock fly through the air then making it fly through the air while you're standing or sitting on it isn't a new power of Flight: Earth it's a new skill, riding on a rock you can already make fly through the air. He already has that as a sub-power of his main power. A new power has to actually be new, something not based in what he already has.

One suggestion made for how to do that is the expenditure of experience the character has earned to 'buy off' as it were learning this new skill. This does not constitute making 'one class privileged above all others', it constitutes giving one class some more flexibility rather than unfairly limiting it.

First off, there is no mechanic in play right now for spending xp to buy skills.
Second off the phrase 'unfairly limiting it' is highly prejoritive implying that the pro-stunt lobby is some how on the side of justice, and that any one that is against stunts is malevolently trying to unfairly cripple a class.
Third it STILL does not address the issue of how we make it fair to the OTHER classes who cant just say "okay I want to learn a new super power."

There is nothing pejorative about it, certainly less so than referring to those willing to accept the idea as the 'pro-stunt lobby'. There also isn't any issue of fairness because there's nothing unfair about it, the other classes don't require anything to somehow 'balance' it because again there's nothing unfair about supers learning new uses for their existing powers. You don't have to go handing out or contriving perks for the other classes because a super-human can now learn new things for his existing powers (if they have range to allow it) rather than never being able to do anything more than what they started with.

It is pejorative when the claim is made that something is "unfairly limiting" people. That is, by the nature of the phrase saying that what is being done is, inherently unfair. Thus it is saying that anyone that is in favor of that is purposefully supporting that unfairness.
And THAT is pejorative.
And I would say that yes, you SHOULD have to allow others to have equal access to the same perk your giving. If your allowing one group to suddenly learn abilities then everyone needs to have that same ability.

No, that's not pejorative, saying something isn't fair is just what it is, one expressing their belief that something isn't right.

Mages are the only people who can cast spells, it's unfair to non-mages to deny them the perk of being able to cast spells. Psychics have the perk that they are the only ones that get psychic powers, to be fair everyone should get to have psychic powers, and so on. Mages can literally go out and learn new powers, why should they have that perk? Since by your definition they are definitely learning powers and don't even have a limitation like a super would have in learning new uses of his powers that he couldn't learn a use unrelated to his existing powers.

Get my point? The various classes all have things that only they have access to, which is why the supers learning new uses for their abilities has ZERO reason that every other class should be handed unjustified perks because the super wants to actually be able to use his powers in new ways related to those powers.

There is also no reason that the costs would be proportional across the levels, the level 10 guy shouldn't find himself having it ten times as hard to figure out how to something compared to the level 1 guy. That's like suggesting the newbie pilot is somehow just as good at learning a complicated flight maneuver as the highly experienced pilot, it just doesn't make sense.

Nor is it reasonable to assume that the higher level characters (who presumably earn more XP) should be allowed to gain more super powers faster than lower level characters. Just as it doesn't always logically follow that experts learn as fast as newbies...

Again, they aren't learning new super-powers. If you're going to keep miss-characterizing them as new super-powers when they aren't we simply can't manage a rational discussion because I simply will not call them what they are not.

You can call it a stunt if you want, but in palladium game terms its a power. I am simply calling it what it is mechanically. You may disagree with that characterization, and you obviously do. But I stand by my definition (which I may add, I have supported with evidence beyond 'no it is not")

No, in your terms it's a power, not in Palladium's game terms. In Palladium's game mechanics it would be a sub-ability of a particular power and not actually a separate or new power. So no your definition is contrary to the actual game mechanics.

Now, instead of simply saying how things can't work how about trying to suggest ways that they COULD work? Because simply insisting how they can't be done isn't helpful in a topic regarding how one might make them work.

Shifting the burden to me to find a solution for your problem is a logical fallacy that I do not choose to fall into. I don't have to come up with a solution, because I do not believe that there IS one. I have stated why I do not believe there is one (it leads to abuse via accumulation of super powers) until someone can provide a mechanic to curb this, to me, inherently fatal flaw, I do not see a reason to work on trying to work out how to implement something that, in my view, can only lead to abuse.

It's not my problem (go look, I didn't start this thread), and if you don't believe there is a solution why are you even bothering with this thread? Responding to nearly every post with 'no that can't possibly work' is not constructive or helpful in the slightest. The fact that you keep labeling them super-powers instead of what they are (new uses for an existing power) seems to be a big aspect of the problem, the skill-laden guy can go back to school and learn new skills and keep becoming more flexible but the guy with a super-power you insist can't ever learn anything new for how to use his power no matter how justified it would be. I guess you're okay though with mages adding more and more powers as they go along without any limit and of course psychics add more powers as they go along too (since you apparently label everything as a power then mages and psychics are adding powers and the mages don't even have to level up to gain new powers they can just go out and learn them just like any other skill).

We differ then on what is a super power.
You feel that flying on a rock is a logical use of an earth power.
I feel that its gaining a new power (flight: Earth)
The books mechanics of powers has specific sub powers.
You seem to be claiming that people should simply be allowed to extend those lists indefinitely, and with no restriction other than 'I think it has some connection to the base power or the characters theme'

That is a gross miss-characterization of what I've said, the only one who's been claiming that has been you not I.

I feel that if you want to add more powers to something, you are, by definition adding new powers to the game, either new minor powers, or new major powers. It doesn't matter if the 'in universe' explaination is that they are a 'logical out growth of my power' the mechanical definition is that it is not covered by Power X, or Power Y, thus it must be Power Z. This is because you do not require training to use the abilities of Power X, nor of Power Y, and all characters with Power X and Power Y have all powers on sub lists 1 and 2. There fore, if the power is not on sub list 1 it is not part of power X since otherwise everyone else with Power X would have it.

Except you aren't adding new powers and you aren't adding new powers to the game you're adding new uses to an existing power. In regards to the rest the point of the discussion was to deal with the character learning new uses of what they've got now that they're actually beyond the point of instinctive, non-trained/experienced use and into having learned how to do more than that. Which is why they logically wouldn't be part of the base power for everyone because they haven't learned how to do that, it's something that required actual experience to learn how to do rather than just automatically available.

I do not have a problem with a mage adding a new spell if they find the formula for it, and their style of magic allows for them to learn new spells. I do have a problem with a mage just saying "oh, I figured out a new use for my old spell...so I can now cast this spell when ever I want" That is one of the defining characteristics of their class after all. Which they 'pay for' by having to pay PPE for their spells, and having extraordinarily harsh criteria for adding new spells in HU.
Psi's can learn new psionics only in the ways specified by their specific class, thus it is a false analogy to say that a class that has a specific, LIMITED, number of specific choices on level up, is some how co-equal to a system of unlimited, customized, open-ended power acquisition.
The super can learn new uses for his power all he wants, that's fine. But he can not just 'learn' to change the mechanical game function of that power.

Except you're insisting he CAN'T learn new uses for his power, that he can't do anything with the power that's not in the default write-up, that he can't use it in any fashion save for that write-up. That the mage can learn new powers (not spells, powers, because going by your definition they're powers so the mages have dozens of powers and can learn hundreds given the opportunity) but the super can't learn anything new about how to use his powers because *gasp* he'd be adding new powers and that would be just terrible! So that Earth mover couldn't levitate someone up to a window on a rock because 'hey he can't do that the power doesn't allow him to grant the power of Levitation to anyone', or levitate a bomb on a rock because 'oh no he can't do that he's not allowed to give himself a ranged explosive power', and so forth.

If a player wants to come up with new uses for his character's powers he should be free to do so, he shouldn't hear 'no sorry can't let you do that it would be wrong to let you be able to be creative the only things you can do are what's in the book and nothing more'. If the book doesn't have guidelines for it then they need to be worked out instead of being told 'no you only get to use that as a hammer you can't use it as anything else even though you ought to be able to use it that way too'.

[eliakon]

Except you're insisting he CAN'T learn new uses for his power, that he can't do anything with the power that's not in the default write-up, that he can't use it in any fashion save for that write-up. That the mage can learn new powers (not spells, powers, because going by your definition they're powers so the mages have dozens of powers and can learn hundreds given the opportunity)

]
Super powers are super powers.
Spells are spells
Psionics are Psionics
Cybernetics are Cybernetics
I have never claimed anywhere that the various catigories are the same. Thus equating two things known to be different, so that you can then easily refute the second thing...is the definition of a straw man.
I have claimed that gaining new super powers means that someone gains new super powers. That is a tautology that I would rather be fascinated to see be proved wrong. I have never claimed anywhere that anything other than super powers are super powers.

but the super can't learn anything new about how to use his powers because *gasp* he'd be adding new powers and that would be just terrible! So that Earth mover couldn't levitate someone up to a window on a rock because 'hey he can't do that the power doesn't allow him to grant the power of Levitation to anyone', or levitate a bomb on a rock because 'oh no he can't do that he's not allowed to give himself a ranged explosive power', and so forth.

Again not what I have claimed.
I have not said that you could not, possibly in a specific one shot, case by case instance do something different. That is storytelling.
What I have said is that the ability to levitate, at will, when ever desired. If able to be done, at will, IS a new power
The ability to finely control rocks in a way replicating the power of telekinesis If able to be done at will, IS a new power

If a player wants to come up with new uses for his character's powers he should be free to do so, he shouldn't hear 'no sorry can't let you do that it would be wrong to let you be able to be creative the only things you can do are what's in the book and nothing more'. If the book doesn't have guidelines for it then they need to be worked out instead of being told 'no you only get to use that as a hammer you can't use it as anything else even though you ought to be able to use it that way too'.

Again your mischaracterizing what I am saying. I am not, and never have been saying that people can only play a certain way. What I am saying is that 'learning to do a trick' is not the same as 'I now have new super powers'

[NMI]

Since both parties now want to discuss each other in addtion to the topic, I am locking this thread.