Would you accept no more figured characteristics?

[zornwil]

Just wanted to gauge the reaction, at least of those willing to answer, if HERO were to drop figured chars and replace them with a system where you pay for all chars directly (e.g., STR doesn't contribute to PD, DEX doesn't contribute to SPD, etc.). Naturally, everything would be recosted.

[Lord Mhoram]

Figured characteristics are one of those things (like the speed chart) that really helps define HERO to me. I think it would be a bad idea to drop them.

[Agent X]

I think this poll will have an unrepresentatively higher percentage of folks For getting rid of figured characteristics because of the nature of the typical poster who likes to go to this part of the boards.

[humantorch101]

I agree that figure char are one of the defining aspects of the system and has been lsince time began.

My vote would be for a couple of more such as a sanity stat for horror hero.

rgds
Torch

[TheEmerged]

I voted "change it", but that comes with the major cavaet that such a change in the system should have the living daylights tested out of it first.

[nHammer]

Change is bad. It could kill the game. There would have to be an all new edition as well as new source books.

Major changes to the Hero System is a bad idea.

[Edsel]

Mark me down in the group that is deadset against this sort of a change. I really like the figured characteristics as they are.

[Zaratustra]

Change is bad. It could kill the game. There would have to be an all new edition as well as new source books.

Major changes to the Hero System is a bad idea.

"We fear change."

[Vanguard00]

I think this poll will have an unrepresentatively higher percentage of folks For getting rid of figured characteristics because of the nature of the typical poster who likes to go to this part of the boards.


Fortunately it seems Agent X's fears are unfounded. It seems most are against the idea (as am I).

[ghost-angel]

I'm not completely against the idea ... I don't honestly think it'll affect gameplay itself if done properly..

But, I don't think it'd be a good idea at this point in the game. First it's one of the defining points of the game really .. especially SPD which isn't perfect but it certainly much better than any other initiative system I've ever encountered - I don't like randomized initiaive honestly.

Second, do you really want to completely rethink how Hero works? Figured characteristics are as ingrained into the system and how it operates almost as much as "Energy Blast" is. I certainly don't. If it were to happen I'd probably not move into the new system without serious pressure to do so.

[zornwil]

I'm not completely against the idea ... I don't honestly think it'll affect gameplay itself if done properly..

But, I don't think it'd be a good idea at this point in the game. First it's one of the defining points of the game really .. especially SPD which isn't perfect but it certainly much better than any other initiative system I've ever encountered - I don't like randomized initiaive honestly.

Second, do you really want to completely rethink how Hero works? Figured characteristics are as ingrained into the system and how it operates almost as much as "Energy Blast" is. I certainly don't. If it were to happen I'd probably not move into the new system without serious pressure to do so.
I don't think any scenario would get rid of SPD and such, just stop basing them on so-called "Basic" characteristics (i.e., everything becomes Basic). You'd still have PD, ED, REC, SPD, END, STUN, just they would be independently costed/purchased.

[Hugh Neilson]

I don't think any scenario would get rid of SPD and such, just stop basing them on so-called "Basic" characteristics (i.e., everything becomes Basic). You'd still have PD, ED, REC, SPD, END, STUN, just they would be independently costed/purchased.

No question it could work. No question it would be a big change. The pricing would get very interesting, to rebalance CON and STR under this new system. To me, the fear is that the balancing doesn't go right, and we end up with a poorer system overall.

[nb: BOD and DEX are easy - drop the cost of each by 1 point, since that'snwhat they grant in figured char's]

[Lord Liaden]

I've seen the arguments for and against, but I've yet to see any urgent need to "fix" the system in this way. Personally I like the rationale for Figured Characteristics and am comfortable and happy with the way they are.

As far as impact to the company goes, such a change would mess up the compatibility with earlier editions of HERO worse than any change to the cost of Powers has done. Not to mention all the sleepless nights it would give Dan Simon trying to update Hero Designer. ;)

That being said, if you were going to do a radical revision of the HERO System (such as creating single generic Attack and Defense Powers, as some have suggested), this is definitely a subject that should be part of that. I would expect such a revision to be a long way off, though. Besides, I wouldn't want it anyway. :p

[Agent X]

Fortunately it seems Agent X's fears are unfounded. It seems most are against the idea (as am I).All I was getting at is that there would probably be a higher number of people on the Hero System Discussion Board who would be interested in such a change than on the other boards, as this is the board the tinkerers would be more likely to be on. I wasn't that worried that they would outnumber the "traditionalists." (Thankfully)

[zornwil]

All I was getting at is that there would probably be a higher number of people on the Hero System Discussion Board who would be interested in such a change than on the other boards, as this is the board the tinkerers would be more likely to be on. I wasn't that worried that they would outnumber the "traditionalists." (Thankfully)
Actually I'm surprised it's as lopsided as it is in favor of "tradition". That's fine with me, though, in this case.

[Dr. Anomaly]

I agree that figure char are one of the defining aspects of the system and has been lsince time began.
Well...how to put this politely...so what?

I agree it's one of the defining aspects. I happen to like things the way they are. I don't, though, happen to believe that just because something is one of the defining characteristics of a game, that it's so sancrosact as to be beyond the possibility of change or replacement.

I don't think such a change is needed/necessary at the moment.

I don't think such a change should be done lightly.

I do think it would be a good idea to look at possible replacements/changes, though, because you never know when that one-in-a-million idea that's a worthwhile replacement may be voiced.

Say "This can't be changed, it's too fundamental," and you will be right.

Say "This probably shouldn't be changed, but something better might come along" and you may be right.

Me, I'll take the latter...the possibility of being right along with the possibility of worthwhile growth as opposed to the certainty of being right and the certainty of no growth.

[Supreme]

I'm a hardcore traditionalist when it comes to HERO, but I think the idea has merit. If done right it would eliminate the advantage held by MAs and Bricks. My only thing is that if you make all stats primary, then you should consolidate some.

[zornwil]

I'm a hardcore traditionalist when it comes to HERO, but I think the idea has merit. If done right it would eliminate the advantage held by MAs and Bricks. My only thing is that if you make all stats primary, then you should consolidate some.
I suppose I will be responsible myself for derailing but...I must ask, Supreme, why do you say there "should" be consolidation? And what consolidation would you recommend?

[lemming]

I've actually played in games where we had dropped figured. The only change noted was that STUN, END, & REC were lower than otherwise. This was a FH game, so I'm not sure how it would scale in Champions.
Other than some cost changes and maybe more stats as powers, I don't see much of a change.

[Dust Raven]

I think it could work. A while back, I worked up a cost chart and tested it out. I wrote up several characters, both using my chart and the original cost system for several genres. Characters cost more with my chart, but not significently or prohibitively so. I think it would need some actual play testing but I think making all Characteristics "primary" would work fine.

Now, having said that, I'm against the change. Ultimately a change like this would have some rather unusual effects on game balance (certain characteristics would cost less, and would be more vulnerable to Adjustment Powers, for example). Buying Characteristics as Powers would be a bit off. Combat Skill Levels would need an entirely new cost structure unless DEX stayed at 3 per 1 (and it shouldn't if SPD became a primary char).

[Solomon]

Currently HERO System has a lot of "legacies" from earlier editions. Differences between 4th and 5th Edition are fairly minor, and understandably so. When you're reviving a solid game system that still has a healthy player base, "grandfathering" is the logic thing to do. That being said, "we've been doing it this way for ages" doesn't equate "we must do it this way forever". I, for one, would like 6th Edition to be as bold a departure from 5th Ed, as 4th Ed was from 3rd Ed.

I'd like to see Figured Characteristics turned into Primary Characteristics and bougth separately.

I would most definitely divorce SPD from DEX, thus getting rid of the minor but bothersome but still keep DEX at 3 points. DEX is currently an inflated characteristic anyway IMHO, is relatively cheap when compared to CSLs and would still be even if it didn't provide SPD. An "all combat" Level can be used for either OCV or DCV for 8 points. 3 points of DEX give you +1 OCV and +1 DCV, improved initiative and maybe better DEX skills, all for 9 points - but once you factor in the SPD rebate, 3 points of DEX effectively cost 6 only Character Points.

Thinkering with STR- and CON-derived characteristics would be trickier. I'd try and keep both STR and CON priced at 2 points.

I think that STR would be fairly priced at 1 point even without Figured Chars. Sure, it woudn't rate favourably against EB as a main attack powers, but it would still have an edge in versatility. STR can be used for lifting, throwing (effectively doubling as a ranged attack under the right circumstances), jumping (but maybe I'd divorce STR from that as well) and grabbing. STR would still rate fairly against Telekinesis for point-efficiency.

Divorcing CON from Figured Chars would be harder, and would require a radical approach. Currently CON's main use is as a cheap way to buy Figured Chars, with resistance to stunning a close second. As Dust Raven implied, pricing CON at less than 2 points would impact the usefulness of Adjustment Powers. I can think of two solutions:
1) Consolidate CON and BODY, pricing the new characteristic at 2 points. BODY is currently an underused Characteristic anyway. This would also remove an issue with Drain BODY being a very nasty attack, IMHO.
2) Remove CON from the picture enterily. To resist stunning, we could either use BODY (effectively the same as #1 above) or, say, half total STUN.

Last note - currently the "no Figured Characteristics" is almost worthless as far as point efficiency goes.

[zornwil]

I would be most interested in a "HERO Machine Language" book or such, something that actually deconstructs HERO to its most elemental levels and provides mechanisms for "recosting for where the sum of the parts is more or less than the parts individually." A system which has nothing more than base elements like "Attack" and "Move" with modifiers. Each characteristics is explained as to how it is derived from fundamental blocks and each Derived Characteristic is explained as to how it groups in an EC with primary characteristics, and so on and so on. It would be a tremendous work, revolutionizing our understanding and sophistication in RPGing.

It would also be neither commercially rewarding nor immediately useful. So it won't be likely to happen. But given what we know now, it would be tremendously gratifying intellectually to deconstruct HERO and build a TRULY ultimate toolkit which in turn is capable of building HERO itself or other such derivative systems operating under the toolkit paradigm.

[Intrope]

I'd not only promote all figureds to primary, I'd also divide Strength into Lift & Hit Power (basically identical to HA dice) and Dex into React (Dex Order) and Dexterity (CV). (And comeliness, positive and negative, would become a talent)

And Zornwil's HERO machine language would be incredibly cool. Wasn't some of that breakdown done on the old boards somewhere?

[zornwil]

I'd not only promote all figureds to primary, I'd also divide Strength into Lift & Hit Power (basically identical to HA dice) and Dex into React (Dex Order) and Dexterity (CV). (And comeliness, positive and negative, would become a talent)

And Zornwil's HERO machine language would be incredibly cool. Wasn't some of that breakdown done on the old boards somewhere?
I know someone started, and I saw a bit of a hint on the champs-l listserv, but I don't think it got too far.

[Vondy]

Could it work?

Yeah, it could be done. It could even be done well. It would have to be play tested extensively to get the prices and balance worked out. It might also affect the guidelines for character creation somewhat.

Should it be done?

No, I don't think so. I would still play hero if it were done, but the mechanical pros and cons I've seen in every thread on the subject balance out. There's no decisive advantage to changing it.

[Dust Raven]

Logically, you shouldn't change the cost of any of the Primary Characteristics, or else you end up with a Drain BODY or CON that is far more effective than a standard attack. The problem then is making characters that are still cost effective. Currently, Bricks/Martial Artists, ones that use a lot of physical Characteristics, seem to be getting quite a bang for their buck. If Figs were cut off, they would suddenly be the most inefficient character types.

Personally, I don't think the awesome bonuses (i.e. Figured Characteristics) you get from STR & CON are all that impressive. At least compared to the effectiveness of many Powers.

[zornwil]

I just realized I haven't seen Gary in a while...

[ghost-angel]

Here's the closest thing I've seen to stripping an RPG down to it's most basic elements available and still worth trying out:

http://w00tism27.tripod.com/carps.html

CARPS.... Customizable Abstract RolePlaying System

It's very very basic and raw. Haven't tried it but still looks playable.

And having pointed that out ... the added "complexity" of Hero and figured stats and other assorted bits is one of the reasons it's so versatile and still balanced and playable. IMO.

[zornwil]

Here's the closest thing I've seen to stripping an RPG down to it's most basic elements available and still worth trying out:

http://w00tism27.tripod.com/carps.html

CARPS.... Customizable Abstract RolePlaying System

It's very very basic and raw. Haven't tried it but still looks playable.

And having pointed that out ... the added "complexity" of Hero and figured stats and other assorted bits is one of the reasons it's so versatile and still balanced and playable. IMO.
Thx, will check it out.

And here I was afraid you were about to say Hybrid... ;)

[Hugh Neilson]

Logically, you shouldn't change the cost of any of the Primary Characteristics, or else you end up with a Drain BODY or CON that is far more effective than a standard attack. The problem then is making characters that are still cost effective. Currently, Bricks/Martial Artists, ones that use a lot of physical Characteristics, seem to be getting quite a bang for their buck. If Figs were cut off, they would suddenly be the most inefficient character types.

Personally, I don't think the awesome bonuses (i.e. Figured Characteristics) you get from STR & CON are all that impressive. At least compared to the effectiveness of many Powers.

I think the costs of characterostics would have to come down. [BTW, the huge debate above would be one reason I think this change is not a good idea.] In addition to the inefficiencies on characteristic-heavy characters, I would note the following:

- to some extent, the Adjustment Powers dilemma could be mitigated by declaring some lower-priced characteristics (most likely CON and BOD) to be "defensive powers".

- Leaving DEX at 3 effectively raises the cost of DEX by 50%, so I think it needs to be lowered. The fact is that many applications of skill levels are cost-effective only in heroic campaigns where the character would have to pay double for the primary characteristic. That 8 point CSL looks a lot better when +3 DEX would cost 16 points (18 - 2 factoring in the savings on SPD) instead of 6!

- maybe we also lower the cost of some figured's to enable a cheaper purchase (since you aren't getting these "automatically" by purchasing primaries any more), and make some of them defensive for adjustment powers.

[lemming]

I just realized I haven't seen Gary in a while...
You're right. I knew we were missing a lot of number crunching. ;)

[Resartus]

The figured statistic that bothers me the most is speed. I wouldn't have tied it to Dex at all. I know a lot of people that are quick on the uptake and can react quickly under pressure that don't have a gymnast's dexterity. The two just don't seem to be related at all to me.

I can understand the relationship between STR and PD, the extra muscle mass is considered armor vs. the body damage in a blunt attack. This makes sense to me because you have to get through the muscle in most cases to get to the vital organs. However it's an assumption that doesn't work well for automatons, aliens, super heros whose strength is really touch only TK, etc.

Basically all of the figured statistics are based on assumptions that don't work in all cases (see above). To solve this we've greated limitations, I'd rather dump the limitations and just make them all basic stats. However, I think that templates or suggested meta-rules should be written to show you how the different stats relate and what should be bought together to pull off a specific concept (brick, speedster, etc) or race. I honestly think it would be less confusing to a new player. It also has the side benefit of reducing the math for folks who don't use HD.

[Hugh Neilson]

The figured statistic that bothers me the most is speed. I wouldn't have tied it to Dex at all. I know a lot of people that are quick on the uptake and can react quickly under pressure that don't have a gymnast's dexterity. The two just don't seem to be related at all to me.

To me, this one is the least relevant to change. I've never seen any character "round down" their Speed anyway, so reallyu they're just buying the Speed they want, and paying 2 points to by each DEX point.

And if you have a character where you REALLY don't want the link, make your Dex "no figured" and it costs the same 2/point. DEX is really only stat where the figured/no figured is a zero sum game.

[Trebuchet]

To me, this one is the least relevant to change. I've never seen any character "round down" their Speed anyway, so reallyu they're just buying the Speed they want, and paying 2 points to by each DEX point.I agree. Disconnecting SPD from DEX is really superfluous. Because of the figured SPD formula (DEX/10 + 1), even characters with very high DEX will have only a 5 or 6 SPD raw. (My character with DEX 43 would rate a SPD 5) A fairly typical brick or EB will generally have a base 3 or 4 SPD. So in essence characters get only the SPD they wish to pay for anyway; all the figured SPD really means is that the character gets a small discount for having a high DEX as well. (Ever seen a character sell back SPD?)

[lemming]

Ever seen a character sell back SPD?
Can't think of any PCs, but a handfull of villians... Which doesn't really counter your argument, but you asked. :D

[Vondy]

And here I was afraid you were about to say Hybrid... ;)
THOU SHALT NOT MENTION THE NAME THAT SHALT NOT BE NAMED!!!

BLASPHEMER!!!

FOUL MOUTHED LOUT!!!

VILE CORRUPTOR!!!

LOVER OF THE SATAN SPAWN!!!

YOU MUST BE PURGED OF YOUR CONTAMINATION!!!

AAAAAAAAAAGH!!!

[Vondy]

The figured statistic that bothers me the most is speed. I wouldn't have tied it to Dex at all. I know a lot of people that are quick on the uptake and can react quickly under pressure that don't have a gymnast's dexterity. The two just don't seem to be related at all to me.


Remember Game Designer's Workshop?

Twighlight 2000 and Traveller 2300 had a stat called "Coolness Under Fire" that served as the character's intitiative score, and had a direct impact on the number of actions you had available. I always regarded SPD as Hero's CUF, which shouldn't be heavily dependent on DEX. It should have some impact, but its also part training, experience, and mental surety. SPD has bothered me off and on over the years, too.

[Dust Raven]

I think the costs of characterostics would have to come down. [BTW, the huge debate above would be one reason I think this change is not a good idea.] In addition to the inefficiencies on characteristic-heavy characters, I would note the following:

- to some extent, the Adjustment Powers dilemma could be mitigated by declaring some lower-priced characteristics (most likely CON and BOD) to be "defensive powers".

- Leaving DEX at 3 effectively raises the cost of DEX by 50%, so I think it needs to be lowered. The fact is that many applications of skill levels are cost-effective only in heroic campaigns where the character would have to pay double for the primary characteristic. That 8 point CSL looks a lot better when +3 DEX would cost 16 points (18 - 2 factoring in the savings on SPD) instead of 6!

- maybe we also lower the cost of some figured's to enable a cheaper purchase (since you aren't getting these "automatically" by purchasing primaries any more), and make some of them defensive for adjustment powers.
DEX is very valuable, and some would say underpriced as it is. Its the Active Cost that shouldn't change. Otherwise it's just too easy to take over a fight by Draining it. CON should only cost 1/2 points per +1, and that would make anyone with a Drain CON nearly invincable unless the his target has lots of Power Defense (a 2d6 Drain will take all but the hardiest martial artists and bricks to "I've fallen and can't use my endurance" in a single hit). That's just too much.

That's why I'm ultimately against seperating them. You either reduce the costs and make Adjustment Powers even more efficient than they are now, or keep the costs the same and make brick and martial artists archtypes laughably inefficient.

[Solomon]

DEX is very valuable, and some would say underpriced as it is. Its the Active Cost that shouldn't change. Otherwise it's just too easy to take over a fight by Draining it. CON should only cost 1/2 points per +1, and that would make anyone with a Drain CON nearly invincable unless the his target has lots of Power Defense (a 2d6 Drain will take all but the hardiest martial artists and bricks to "I've fallen and can't use my endurance" in a single hit). That's just too much.

That's why I'm ultimately against seperating them. You either reduce the costs and make Adjustment Powers even more efficient than they are now, or keep the costs the same and make brick and martial artists archtypes laughably inefficient.

Since most PC tend to buy up most Figured Characteristics anyway (with the possible exception of END), and since 10 AP of STR net you 11 points of Fig Chars while 20 AP of CON net you 21 points of Fig Chars, it is fair to say that STR and CON are effectively almost free. They tend to be limited more by character concept than by point efficiency issues in my experience. Most bricks effectively get 40-60 points of "free" Fig Chars over and above what other archetypes get. In a way, that's a form of PC niche protection for bricks. Bricks tend to get a huge rebate on Fig Chars much like Energy Projectors usually enjoy the benefits of Multipowers and ECs, and I agree that does serve a useful purpose.

So, I can see your point for bricks - divorcing Primary and Figured chars without lowering the Primary cost would severely affect them. But I cannot see the point for Martial Artists. MAs tend to have STR and CON scores close to that of Energy Projectors, and an higher DEX. Divorcing DEX and SPD but keeping DEX priced at 3 points would force MAs to pay maybe 15 or 18 CP more than under current rules to rebuild their character, but rarely more than 5 CP over what other archetypes would pay. That's hardly "laughably inefficient".

[Supreme]

I suppose I will be responsible myself for derailing but...I must ask, Supreme, why do you say there "should" be consolidation? And what consolidation would you recommend?
There should be consolidation because we have fourteen stats as is. I advocate simplicity and playability over realism. I also like the idea in GURPS that your stat is your stat roll. Why have two numbers for the same thing? I think stuff like Constitution, Endurance, Stun, and Body should be condensed into fewer -- if not one -- stat. If you want to have a character whose abilities contain proficiency with one or more aspects of the stat, you can buy Advantages to reflect that. I think that PD and ED should definitely be one stat. Everyone buys them at practically the same level anyway. If you want a character who is more or less resilient to a particular category, reflect that with limited defenses or vulnerabilities.

[PhilFleischmann]

The only real difference between having figured stats as-is or no figured stats and recosting everything is in the effect on Adjustment Powers. Yes, DEX really costs only 2 points per, because no one ever rounds down their SPD. However, it still costs 3 points per with respect to being Drained or Aided. This is a useful distinction, IMO.

[zornwil]

There should be consolidation because we have fourteen stats as is. I advocate simplicity and playability over realism. I also like the idea in GURPS that your stat is your stat roll. Why have two numbers for the same thing? I think stuff like Constitution, Endurance, Stun, and Body should be condensed into fewer -- if not one -- stat. If you want to have a character whose abilities contain proficiency with one or more aspects of the stat, you can buy Advantages to reflect that. I think that PD and ED should definitely be one stat. Everyone buys them at practically the same level anyway. If you want a character who is more or less resilient to a particular category, reflect that with limited defenses or vulnerabilities.
Okay. I vehemently disagree in that I think the granularity of the stats - however they are constructed - is key to HERO, although I suppose you could break that down with limitations (-1/2 only for STUN damage; -1/4 not to be STUNned). Okay, maybe i don't "vehemently" disagree, but I do think it is not a good idea. But I understand and I'm not saying it's unreasonable or incoherent, thanks.

[Dust Raven]

So, I can see your point for bricks - divorcing Primary and Figured chars without lowering the Primary cost would severely affect them. But I cannot see the point for Martial Artists. MAs tend to have STR and CON scores close to that of Energy Projectors, and an higher DEX. Divorcing DEX and SPD but keeping DEX priced at 3 points would force MAs to pay maybe 15 or 18 CP more than under current rules to rebuild their character, but rarely more than 5 CP over what other archetypes would pay. That's hardly "laughably inefficient".
Martial Artists in my games tend to have rather high STR and CON scores, though not as high as Bricks. It's not that uncommon to see a MA with a 30 STR and a 25-30 CON. Granted, you don't have to build a MA this way, but I've seen some Bricks with a STR of 20 (in a regular Champions campaign).

Laughably inefficient might be a bit strong, but only a bit. At 2 active points per point of DEX, it's too easy to Drain. Speedsters and Martial Artists will be reduced to "normal" levels rather quickly, and those with more standard, or below standard DEX values will collapse far more quickly. On top of that, DEX itself becomes more cost efficient than CSLs (some say it already is, but DEX can't add damage or bounce attacks).

[Resartus]

To me, this one is the least relevant to change. I've never seen any character "round down" their Speed anyway, so reallyu they're just buying the Speed they want, and paying 2 points to by each DEX point.

And if you have a character where you REALLY don't want the link, make your Dex "no figured" and it costs the same 2/point. DEX is really only stat where the figured/no figured is a zero sum game.

I don't have an issue with the cost, I'd leave DEX at 3 points even if you seperate it from SPD. I was just making the point that I disagree with the assumption that the association is based on. For that matter, given the race/setting/genre you could argue away all of the assumptions that the current associations are based on. I'd rather cost them seperate and make them all primary/talents/powers and use a template system to describe how they interrelate on a case by case basis.

[Hugh Neilson]

I was just making the point that I disagree with the assumption that the association is based on. For that matter, given the race/setting/genre you could argue away all of the assumptions that the current associations are based on. I'd rather cost them seperate and make them all primary/talents/powers and use a template system to describe how they interrelate on a case by case basis.

So the case here is "leave them interrelated and sever them on a case by case basis" (using No Figured, -1/2, or selling back a figured stat) or "sever them and use templates to show how they should interrelate"

I'm not seeing a huge advantage to either system. Where change cannot be shown as significantly superior, I say "why change?"

[Resartus]

So the case here is "leave them interrelated and sever them on a case by case basis" (using No Figured, -1/2, or selling back a figured stat) or "sever them and use templates to show how they should interrelate"

I'm not seeing a huge advantage to either system. Where change cannot be shown as significantly superior, I say "why change?"

You can only get points from selling back one figured statistic. If I take the "no figured statistic" limitation is severs all statistics even if I just want one of them severed for a specific concept. A template system would let you change change how "secondary" statistics relate to each other, basically it would be custom figured statistics. This would be very nice for alien races and automatons. I'd also force the template descriptions to contain the logic (or SFX if you will) for relating a set of statistics together. This could be very helpful for new players trying to understand the system, especially if you extend the templates to archtypes like the "typical" brick. I new player would see the template for a brick and know what the ratios to use when purchasing stats.

Ideally the "default" heroic human character's template would look like and cost the same as the current figured statistics. But the GM and players would be able to build exactly the stats they want for a character concept without having to sell back stats and take limitations on their stats.

Again, I like the way it works now, but I'd like to see a little more granularity/flexibility with stat purchases.

[Hugh Neilson]

You can only get points from selling back one figured statistic. If I take the "no figured statistic" limitation is severs all statistics even if I just want one of them severed for a specific concept. A template system would let you change change how "secondary" statistics relate to each other, basically it would be custom figured statistics. This would be very nice for alien races and automatons. I'd also force the template descriptions to contain the logic (or SFX if you will) for relating a set of statistics together. This could be very helpful for new players trying to understand the system, especially if you extend the templates to archtypes like the "typical" brick. I new player would see the template for a brick and know what the ratios to use when purchasing stats.

Ideally the "default" heroic human character's template would look like and cost the same as the current figured statistics. But the GM and players would be able to build exactly the stats they want for a character concept without having to sell back stats and take limitations on their stats.

Again, I like the way it works now, but I'd like to see a little more granularity/flexibility with stat purchases.

Again, I'm not saying your system is without merit. I am saying it's not a sufficient improvement, to me, to justify changing the system. To me, "templating" the relationship of figured to primarys createws an added complexity for the game, one which is not justified by the (to me, marginal at best) benefits to be achieved. In particular, the "archetype" list strikes me as a significant step to making Hero a "class" system, a major step backwards.

About the only real benefit is the ability to "sell back" multiple figured stats. This restriction is needed solely because (at present) 5 STR or 5 CON grants more in figured stats than it costs. That could be "solved" by reducing the costs of figured stats (REC, STUN and END) and changing the mix so that STR and CON grant less fugured than they cost. I'd like to see +15 STR grant +5 stats (and a -1/2 limit for "No Figured"), and +15 CON grant 22 points of figured (with "no figured" priced at -2 3/4). At this point, you could sever them without complications (leaving only BOD). No need to change DEX - it works already.

This would require lowering the price of REC, STUN and END. As a rough guideline, one could consider the following:

Reduce the price of STUN to 1/2 point, REC to 1 point and END to 1/3 point. Declare them "defensive powers" so that adjustment powers do not gain a huge advantage. Don't mess with PD or ED since they link with other defensive powers. Grant figured as follows:

STR grants STR/5 in PD and STR/7.5 in REC.
10 STR grants 1 PD and 1 REC.

CON grants CON/5 in ED, CON/3.75 in REC, 2/3 CON in STUN and 2x CON in END.
10 CON grants 2 ED, 3 REC, 7 STUN and 20 END.

BOD grants BOD x 1 1/3 STUN.
10 BOD grants 13 STUN

RESULT: STR and BOD get a -1/2 limit for No Figured Char; CON gets -2.75. These are now mathematically correct. DEx and SPD are unchanged, so -1/2 works. We can now eliminate the "can only sell back 1 figured" restriction.

A standard (10's across the board) guy has the same base figured's as before.

BOD and CON contribute more, and STR contributes less. Appropriate as STR gives considerably more other benefits.

LOTS of changes to the dynamic. eg. since there is no longer a "figured' advantage to high STR and CON, do we need to allow EC's of characteristics for Bricks and other stat-based characters to keep them balanced with, say, blasters and others more reliant on frameworks?

Again, too much to worry about for not enough benefit, at least in my eyes. In my experience, the system works. If it ain't broke, why fix it? Maybe those having problems with STR and CON in heroic games might find this a reasonable fix, but I suspect STR (and DEX) would remain prized.

[Talon]

I'm in favor of turning figured characteristics into primary characteristics (it seems like some people may have thought the poll question meant "removed figured characteristics from the game entirely -- no more SPD, REC, etc."). I think it would make the game easier and less math-intensive.

However, such a change would have to wait for 6th Edition. I do think that Hero has fallen behind the state of the art in several game-design areas, and sincerely hope that whenever 6th Edition does come around, Steve et. al. take the chance to make some large-scale changes.

[zornwil]

I'm in favor of turning figured characteristics into primary characteristics (it seems like some people may have thought the poll question meant "removed figured characteristics from the game entirely -- no more SPD, REC, etc."). I think it would make the game easier and less math-intensive.

However, such a change would have to wait for 6th Edition. I do think that Hero has fallen behind the state of the art in several game-design areas, and sincerely hope that whenever 6th Edition does come around, Steve et. al. take the chance to make some large-scale changes.
Maybe you posted it in the thread about needed things in HERO, but what are you referring to re "Hero has fallen behind the state of the art in several game-design areas"?

[Killer Shrike]

I like figured characteristics.

If anything, Id like to see Mental DEF added as a figured. I dont like the oddball behaviour of buying 1 pt of MD getting you EGO/5, but not buying 1 pt of MD = no MD at all.

However, I do think that the impact on figureds should either be more evenly spread out among the primaries, or else the cost of the primaries should be changed to reflect their impact on Figureds. STR is obviously the worst offender in this regard, with CON following close behind.

+10 STR costs 10 points but also yields +2 PD +2 REC and +5 STUN, 11 more points of value. +10 CON costs 20 points but yields +2 ED +2 REC +5 STUN and +20 END, 21 points of value back. Thats an odd recursion in a point buy system.

[Hugh Neilson]

However, I do think that the impact on figureds should either be more evenly spread out among the primaries, or else the cost of the primaries should be changed to reflect their impact on Figureds. STR is obviously the worst offender in this regard, with CON following close behind.

I consider STR the worst offender by far, in that STR also gives alot more benefits than CON outside figured's.

[Killer Shrike]

I consider STR the worst offender by far, in that STR also gives alot more benefits than CON outside figured's.
Very true, but I was limiting my comparison to just the figured recursion. Didnt want to start another "STR is too cheap" thread ;)

[Hugh Neilson]

Very true, but I was limiting my comparison to just the figured recursion. Didnt want to start another "STR is too cheap" thread ;)

How about a "figureds are too expensive" thread? :angel:

[Talon]

Maybe you posted it in the thread about needed things in HERO, but what are you referring to re "Hero has fallen behind the state of the art in several game-design areas"?

Here are a few, I'm sure there are more:

Having a unified mechanic -- the combat and skill mechanics are the same thing but expressed differently (Stealth 13- vs. +4 with Bows, even though mathematically the rolls are pretty much the same thing).

Having answers to common game questions in the book -- effects of sleep, breaking down doors, climbing common surfaces, etc. Things that players want to do a lot with a skill or power should be directly addressed in that skill or power's description. The answers should be specific, not "easy/medium/difficult" general.

Having unified stats for different entities (characters, walls, vehicles, computers, etc.). Some things having DEF and others having PD/ED is strange. Similarly, some things have 0 END on movement for free (vehicles) is an unneeded complexity.

Dealing with the power oddities of 5th: Regeneration is the biggie here, Instant Change 2nd, but also the Armor / FF thing and probably a couple others I'm not thinking of. Regeneration should be its own power or the rules should be changed to make it a consistently created power, not a power with special advantages only it can take.

Updating the character presentation technique: right now characters are presented in a point-oriented format that is very hard to use during a game session. There should be a writeup designed to be easy to use (put all CV modifiers in one place; all attacks in one place; etc.) backed up by the point writeups. Try translating the poison attacks in Bestiary for a good example.

All in all, increasing the system's usability both through presentation and mechanics changes.

[TheEmerged]

Dealing with the power oddities of 5th: Regeneration is the biggie here, Instant Change 2nd, but also the Armor / FF thing and probably a couple others I'm not thinking of. Regeneration should be its own power or the rules should be changed to make it a consistently created power, not a power with special advantages only it can take.

Just my opinion -- no more and no less -- but the wrong powers got "unified". Instant Change and Regeneration worked as seperate powers, and frankly unifying them (with Transform and Healing, respectively) created more issues than they solved (check out the Regen section of the Rules FAQ sometime).

On the other hand, a couple of cases that *begged* to get unified -- like Armor & Force Field, or Force Wall and Entangle -- were left to their own devices.

[zornwil]

Here are a few, I'm sure there are more:

Having a unified mechanic -- the combat and skill mechanics are the same thing but expressed differently (Stealth 13- vs. +4 with Bows, even though mathematically the rolls are pretty much the same thing).

Having answers to common game questions in the book -- effects of sleep, breaking down doors, climbing common surfaces, etc. Things that players want to do a lot with a skill or power should be directly addressed in that skill or power's description. The answers should be specific, not "easy/medium/difficult" general.

Having unified stats for different entities (characters, walls, vehicles, computers, etc.). Some things having DEF and others having PD/ED is strange. Similarly, some things have 0 END on movement for free (vehicles) is an unneeded complexity.

Dealing with the power oddities of 5th: Regeneration is the biggie here, Instant Change 2nd, but also the Armor / FF thing and probably a couple others I'm not thinking of. Regeneration should be its own power or the rules should be changed to make it a consistently created power, not a power with special advantages only it can take.

Updating the character presentation technique: right now characters are presented in a point-oriented format that is very hard to use during a game session. There should be a writeup designed to be easy to use (put all CV modifiers in one place; all attacks in one place; etc.) backed up by the point writeups. Try translating the poison attacks in Bestiary for a good example.

All in all, increasing the system's usability both through presentation and mechanics changes.
Interesting, thank you!

It would be interesting if we merged PD and ED into DEF and then simply allowed the use of limitations to represent fractions for different SFX resistances. But I'm really tossing that out without any real thought...just as food for thought...

[Agent X]

Updating the character presentation technique: right now characters are presented in a point-oriented format that is very hard to use during a game session. There should be a writeup designed to be easy to use (put all CV modifiers in one place; all attacks in one place; etc.) backed up by the point writeups. Try translating the poison attacks in Bestiary for a good example.

So true. It is amazing how simple this game looks to a veteran gamer if you set it up similarly to, say, a D&D character sheet with an area for characteristics, an area for attacks, an area for skills, an area for senses, etc.