Basic Action Super Heroes!

I'm in the process of creating an extremely fast character. Using super-speed 3, paired weapons, and swift strike, this character can attack his foes 6 times per page. His attack is a Special Attack linked with Nullify.

Does that mean that he can attempt to Nullify a single power 6 times on one foe, or even Nullify up to 6 separate powers on that same character?

Am I "power-gaming" or "munchkin-ing" it? Is that using a loop hole to create something too powerful, or could it actually be a reasonable creation, assuming it's legit?

Comments/thoughts/gripes welcome!

BTW, I hope whoever reads this is having a good day, whenever they read it.

actually i think that monstrosity would strike 7 times with a -2 dice penalty on all attacks for 10 pts that's borderline , I think adding nullify crosses the boarder , but sure its legal

What's the concept for the special attack linked to nullify?

How is it six times? The most should be four:

One time (Everyone Gets this)
Two Times (Super Speed 3)
Three Times w/ -1 Dice Penalty (Paired Weapons)
Four Times w/ -2 Dice Penalty (Swift Strike)

Too powerful = the Narrator says "This is too powerful" He's free to say it before the campaign starts- or any number of sessions into the campaign.

paired weapons gives an extra attack per panel
super speed grants more panels up to 2 more
3 panels with 2 attacks per panel is 6 attacks
swift strike adds one attack per page

He mentioned Super Speed 3 which I took to be 3 pts, or one extra panel. So that would be 5 attacks (2 per panel with Paired, plus 1 per page from Swift Strike).

If it was the 5 pt version of Super Speed that gives two extra panels, then gryfn is right that it would be 7.

Lindharin and Gryfn are right. 5, not six.

As far as the concept, I admit I don't actually have one. This started as an exercise for myself in building power combinations. I've been testing the waters, so to speak, with BASH's versatility. So far so good.

I had imagined a villain who, when transformed into his super form, became a Naga (half man, half snake) who either used magic daggers or just claws. However, I don't have any type of explanation for exactly how or why his attacks nullify powers. Like I said, it was just an exercise in combo's.

So... now I think we've settled the question about how many attacks, does it seem reasonable that he would get a chance to Nullify with each and every attack, or should it be only one Nullify per page, period?

Maybe the wording for paired needs to be changed to page and not panel.

I would say nullify would only work once per page.

5 attacks at -2 seems a lot, espceically when you could cancel the minus out for 3 pts e.g lightning attack (boost agility 3pts with speed attacks) .

Then again is that legal in its self.

Say this guy has agility 3 the boost would take him to 6 and then the minus back down to 4. So the end results is under the max 5 but he theory he has given himself 6 agility in certain situations which is illegal?

Boost cannot raise you to above 5. Also, it affects multipliers, the penalties for Paired Weapons & Swift Strike are Dice Penalties- which won't be negated by boost (but would be mitigated by having a higher multiplier).

By the book, I don't see anything stopping 5 nullifies (when linked to special attacks, etc.) in one page. But does it seem reasonable? That would depend on the concept. If the Nullify had a very restrictive limitation like "Nullify Armor and Force Field Only" (representing some sort of armor-piercing attack), I might allow it; I'd at least give it some consideration. But if it was an unlimited Nullify and each time it is used it could Nullify any power, then I doubt I would allow it.

Lindharin, I agree. You make a good point. I think limiting Nullify to only one aspect in this case would be mandatory... or at least it would be if I were GMing... which I am.

BigSteveUK, I agree with you. Ultimately, it's BASHMAN's call on errata, but possibly a change to Paired Weapons description is in order, at least to prevent things like this again.

Of course, that would change a LOT of already created characters, so probably leaving it up to the GM is best.

Regardless, this has been an interesting discussion. Thanks to all who participated!