All editions Possible bug with Device (2e)

[atlarman]

Hi all-

Not quite sure if this is a bug with HL when it comes to a device I built or if im missing something rules wise but heres the deal... i created a rank one device(a cape) with a rank 1 flight gliding flaw...had a few pp left so I thought id adda rank in protection (+1 toughness) the device doesnt stack this bonus to toughness even when device is activated. Is this a bug or correct??

 

[Duggan]

Your guy isn't using any equipment?

 

[atlarman]

Your guy isn't using any equipment?

Yes he has an armored jumpsuit as far as costume/ defenses... i just made the cape device as a glider and had pp left fot it protection 1 was an afterthought haha thought it would boost his toughness to 10....but im starting to think such things may not stack ( power of a device w/existing armor)??

 

[Woodclaw]

Yes he has an armored jumpsuit as far as costume/ defenses... i just made the cape device as a glider and had pp left fot it protection 1 was an afterthought haha thought it would boost his toughness to 10....but im starting to think such things may not stack ( power of a device w/existing armor)??

In this case it isn't a bug, in M&M the bonus from the Equipment doesn't stack with anything but the natural character bonuses (if applyable), otherwise only the highest bonus counts.

 

[atlarman]

In this case it isn't a bug, in M&M the bonus from the Equipment doesn't stack with anything but the natural character bonuses (if applyable), otherwise only the highest bonus counts.

Thanks wood claw, i thought that was possibly the case(just wasnt sure if there might have been an exception to the rule due to the sources are different ie one a device and one from the device.

However today IT DOES seem to be stacking- i went back in and tinkerd w the capes protection(made it limited to fire only -3 flaw) now when protection is checked its adding but only seem to be adding half +3 toughness and showing a trade off ( as i was @ +9 toughness before anyway...lol i went up to +6 protection....im lost any clue whats up?? is hl correct??

 

[Duggan]

It looks about right to me... you have 3 points of Toughness from your Consitution, 6 from the cape, and 3 from Defensive Roll. That adds up to the 12 you have displayed. The Armored Jumpsuit is being ignored entirely (although some GMs would let you add it on for non-fire situations).

You have a +2/-2 Toughness/Defense tradeoff.

 

[atlarman]

It looks about right to me... you have 3 points of Toughness from your Consitution, 6 from the cape, and 3 from Defensive Roll. That adds up to the 12 you have displayed. The Armored Jumpsuit is being ignored entirely (although some GMs would let you add it on for non-fire situations).

You have a +2/-2 Toughness/Defense tradeoff.

Thanks duggan I saw you reply after I sent the msg bro....u are awesome so hero lab is just ignoring the jumpsuit when the cape is involved?? cool i like that theres a checkbox to toggle protection on and off anyway for nonfire situaations....btw- im the type of gm that would allow the jumpsuit to stack in there in fire sitches....im that kinda guy....now i only hope my gm is too.

 

[Duggan]

Thanks duggan I saw you reply after I sent the msg bro....u are awesome so hero lab is just ignoring the jumpsuit when the cape is involved?? cool i like that theres a checkbox to toggle protection on and off anyway for nonfire situaations....btw- im the type of gm that would allow the jumpsuit to stack in there in fire sitches....im that kinda guy....now i only hope my gm is too.

The reason for generally not allowing buying above the limit is "sandbagging", extra levels of an ability to resist things like Drain and Nullify. In my opinion, it doesn't factor in here, especially with equipment since it doesn't stack, and also because each is a separate thing which can be Nullified or Drained.