[quote=@Behemoth542]
[@Genni] The thing I want is a debuff that impedes Sigma from [i]attacking[/i] for a turn. Any kind of offensive action would be impossible to do not because of lack of ammo, but because of the weapon overheating. Running out of Ammo for Sigma would mean going back to an ammo depot and loading it up, as it works similar to direct ammo feed (like a bullet belt for a machine gun).
[/quote][quote=@Eklispe]
Sigma is inflicted with the [b]Overheating[/b] status effect and must spend the next turn cooling down before he can attack?
[/quote]
That would work too, just as long as a status effect of some sort would be in play for me to use as part of the round resolution process.

I only used the '[i][b]Out Of Ammo[/b][/i]' status because that's one which has already appeared in the game and has the same effect as you were describing, but if you'd like to use a different name then that's fine too. :)

[quote=@Eklispe]
Fireball: Flare concentrates and blasts an enormous ball of fire exploding and dealing the damage of a conventional attack to all targets in a large area. [[color=gold]Energy: 6[/color]]
[/quote]
If you're wanting a full damage field effect attack then it'd have to be a little more expensive unless you put some sort of limiting effect on it as well.

You could either put the cost up to [color=yellow]10 Energy[/color], spend another Skill Point and lose the +5 Health upgrade you'd be wanting or add a status effect like '[i][b]Extinguished[/b][/i]' which would prevent you from attacking until you'd spent a turn reigniting your powers. I would use the term 'cooldown', but I think in this case 'heat up' would be more appropriate. :hehe

[quote=@Eklispe]
Flame body: Any heat based damage that would be dealt to Flare is instead converted directly into [color=green]HP[/color]. However he now suffers 50% more cold damage.
[/quote]
No problem with this, but if you're adding a cold vulnerability I'd also be willing to allow you to absorb 1 Energy each time Flare was hit by a heat-based attack as well.

Also could you make the vulnerability '50% (rounded down)', to make the maths a little easier for me? :)

[quote=@rush99999]
I think [@SimplyJohn] meant this part:
[/quote]
...no giant electric monkeys fighting double-headed dragons..?