Shrinking Costs

[MarkusDark]

Is there a reason that Shrinking costs 10 points per level instead of 5? It seems that everything in a level is dividable by 2 (+2DCV, etc.) so I wondered why it wasn't 5 points per level (+1DCV, etc.).

[Steve Long]

This is a "design philosophy" question, not a rules question, so I've moved it to "HERO System Discussion" so people can, if they want, discuss it. :)

[MarkusDark]

Okey. Anyone? I managed to sneak a peek at my rulebook during lunchtime and noticed that the only thing that would stop you from purchasing shrinking in 5 point increments is the additional knockback. But you could put that at 1.5" of additional knockback per 5 points, rounding up.

[Blue Angel]

Originally posted by MarkusDark
Okey. Anyone? I managed to sneak a peek at my rulebook during lunchtime and noticed that the only thing that would stop you from purchasing shrinking in 5 point increments is the additional knockback. But you could put that at 1.5" of additional knockback per 5 points, rounding up.

Or just alternate extra knockback at +2, +1,+2,+1 etc..

[Gary]

Originally posted by MarkusDark
Is there a reason that Shrinking costs 10 points per level instead of 5? It seems that everything in a level is dividable by 2 (+2DCV, etc.) so I wondered why it wasn't 5 points per level (+1DCV, etc.).

The only philosophical problem with this is that somewhere you would have to multiply by .7 to get size. With the current method, you merely have to divide by 2 each level which is much easier. :cool:

[Blue Angel]

Originally posted by Gary
The only philosophical problem with this is that somewhere you would have to multiply by .7 to get size. With the current method, you merely have to divide by 2 each level which is much easier. :cool:

Yeh... Hero gamers hate math.;)

[Talon]

So that they have a reason to revise the Growth/Shrinking rules yet again in 6th Edition. :)

[Lord Liaden]

Well, aside from the fact that it's cost this much ever since the first edition of Champions ;) , there are several factors that become more difficult to keep track of if you try to break Shrinking into 5-pt. increments: the odd number of inches of Knockback (+3" per level); the reduction in mass (1/8 per level - how much would half a level be? :confused: ); and the increased damage from Growth Momentum (1D6 per level). Certainly you could work these things out if the extra detail was worth it to you.

[DevoDog]

Actually, Shrinking cost 5 pts/level in the 1st Edition of Champions. That was a real pain for me when my primary character had Shrinking at 0 END Cost and it doubled the cost.

Aside from the cost change, the only main difference I've seen (not counting 3rd edition which really changed Shrinking/Growth effects) is that Shrinking no longer cuts your ground movement in half.

While it does make sense, it simply meant that, for the most part, every shrinker had Flight.

[MarkusDark]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden
Well, aside from the fact that it's cost this much ever since the first edition of Champions ;) , there are several factors that become more difficult to keep track of if you try to break Shrinking into 5-pt. increments: the odd number of inches of Knockback (+3" per level); the reduction in mass (1/8 per level - how much would half a level be? :confused: ); and the increased damage from Growth Momentum (1D6 per level). Certainly you could work these things out if the extra detail was worth it to you.

Actually, the increased damage from Growth Momentum in Shrinking is 2d6 per 10 points/level, so the division is simple there. The reduction in mass is also simple enough. Half of 1/8 is 1/16. I actually have never played in a game where the weight of a shrinking character came into necessity but even if it did, I would imagine that it would be no harder to divide by 16 as it would be to divide by 8.

The only thing not easily divisible by 2 is the KB inches. And I don't know how they arrived at 3" per 10 points of shrinking to begin with. I don't see a major problem with a +1" per 5 points - especially since you do not take extra damage from the increased KB modifier from Shrinking.

Size would get a little bit harder, I'll admit. But I don't think it would be too much trouble. 1.5m, 1m, .75m, .5m, .375m, .25m, etc...

I am just thinking that since Growth is done in incriments of 5, why wouldn't Shrinking be done that way as well?

[TaxiMan]

Growth has weird steps too, they just hide it by saying "for every 3 levels this and that happen". For Shrinking, it'd be "for every other level, add 3" KB". I used the "every other level" instead of "each two levels" since the KB adjustment is a detrimental effect. So for the first level of Shrinking, you suffer the KB. I went that way for simplicity, and because Steve often rules that bad stuff happens easily while good stuff only happens when all conditions are met.

[Bartman]

I wish I had seen this already. I did a table for shrinking at 5pts a level years ago. you are welcome of course to use any or all of it as you wish. Here are the first 100pts worth of the power plus a half dozen other significant steps, if you want someone cpable of replicating the capabilities of the Atom.



Level Pts KB DCV PER Mass Height Examples
0 0 0 0 0 100 kg 2 m
1 5 1 1 -1 35 kg 1.4m
2 10 3 2 -2 12.5 kg 1 m
3 15 4 3 -3 4.5 kg 70 cm
4 20 6 4 -4 1.6 kg 50 cm
5 25 7 5 -5 480 g 35 cm
6 30 9 6 -6 200 g 25 cm
7 35 10 7 -7 70 g 17.5 cm
8 40 12 8 -8 25 g 12.5 cm
9 45 13 9 -9 9 g 9 cm Softball
10 50 15 10 -10 3.2 g 6.4 cm
11 55 16 11 -11 960 mg 4.5 cm
12 60 18 12 -12 400 mg 3.2 cm
13 65 19 13 -13 140 mg 2.2 cm
14 70 21 14 -14 50 mg 1.6 cm
15 75 22 15 -15 18 mg 1.1 cm Human Iris
16 80 24 16 -16 6.4 mg 8 mm
17 85 25 17 -17 2.2 mg 6 mm
18 90 27 18 -18 800 µg 4 mm
19 95 28 19 -19 280 µg 3 mm
20 100 30 20 -20 100 µg 2 mm
22 110 33 22 -22 12.5 µg 1 mm Spark Plug Gap
28 140 42 28 -28 25 ng 125 µm Paper Thickness
35 175 52 35 -35 18 pg 11 µm Liver Cell
42 210 63 42 -42 12.5 fg 1 µm E. Coli Bacterium
48 240 72 48 -48 25 ag 125 nm Large Virus
55 275 82 55 -55 18 zg 11 nm Cell Membrane Thickness
62 310 93 62 -62 12.5 yg 1 nm Diameter of DNA
95 475 142 95 -95 11 fm Hydrogen Nucleus

[Gary]

Funny how my OCV 3 self has no problem hitting a DCV 15 ant. :D

[MarkusDark]

Heh, I wonder how easy it would be to hit that ant if'n it was busy firin' 12d6 EB's at ya. ;)

My OCV 3 self could slap Steven Segal in the head - if he wasn't expecting it.

[lemming]

Originally posted by MarkusDark
My OCV 3 self could slap Steven Segal in the head - if he wasn't expecting it.
Then again Steven Segal should expect to be slapped around.

[Lord Liaden]

Bartman, that's a very fine piece of detail work - thank you! :D

One minor quibble, though (I wouldn't be a Hero gamer if I didn't have one): Your first 5-pt. level of Shrinking reduces height from 2 m. to 1 m., which is half original height. Wouldn't you need 10 pts. in Shrinking to get to half height?

[Bartman]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden
Bartman, that's a very fine piece of detail work - thank you! :D

One minor quibble, though (I wouldn't be a Hero gamer if I didn't have one): Your first 5-pt. level of Shrinking reduces height from 2 m. to 1 m., which is half original height. Wouldn't you need 10 pts. in Shrinking to get to half height?

What the? grumble... grumble... grumble... :mad:

Of course you are right, and it has been corrected.

[Bartman]

Originally posted by Gary
Funny how my OCV 3 self has no problem hitting a DCV 15 ant. :D

How about an ant that can run 20+KM an hour and leap several meters? :) That's why we don't use shrinking always on for inherant sizes any more.

[Blue Angel]

Originally posted by Gary
Funny how my OCV 3 self has no problem hitting a DCV 15 ant. :D

I was thinking about that very problem some time ago. It seems to me that once a target is smaller than the size of your hand that the DCV penalty is based on the size of your hand not the target. AKA "The fly swatter affect". This is similar to the Brick using the car to make an AOE attack. Though the attack penalties for the size of your hand is still pretty severe, about -9 OCV.

[MarkusDark]

Interesting note - a brick can pick up a car, table, etc, and make it into an AOE attack. However, someone who has grown to 3.5 hexes in height and 2 hexes wide cannot simply 'belly flop' to make an AOE attack. :)

[Blue Jogger]

Originally posted by MarkusDark
Interesting note - a brick can pick up a car, table, etc, and make it into an AOE attack. However, someone who has grown to 3.5 hexes in height and 2 hexes wide cannot simply 'belly flop' to make an AOE attack. :)

Now I want to build a character that looks like a volkswagon bug that can 'belly flop' on escaping villians.

"Herbie, he's getting away!"

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by MarkusDark
[B]The reduction in mass is also simple enough. Half of 1/8 is 1/16. I actually have never played in a game where the weight of a shrinking character came into necessity but even if it did, I would imagine that it would be no harder to divide by 16 as it would be to divide by 8.{/B]

Ummm...no .

1/16 per level is a faster weight reduction. Halving the rate of descent would mean each leven reduces your mass to about 35% of the prior level (.35 x .35 = .1225, about the .125 of 1/8).

And three levels of Growth would be offset by one level of shrinking - three levels of Growth doubles your height and octuples your mass. One level of shrinking halves height and reduces mass to 1/8. [Hmmm...if I buy 3 levels of growth with a Linked level of shrinking, I get all the stat bonuses and stay the same height...]

You can buy half an EB die for 3 points, and 1/3 of a KA die for 5 points. If you want to buy half levels of shrinking, go ahead. Just assume you get half of anything evenly divisible by two, and round anything not evenly divisible against the character (so +2" knockback).

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by DevoDog
Actually, Shrinking cost 5 pts/level in the 1st Edition of Champions.

I'm reasonably certain you're mistaken, there: Shrinking has always been 10 points/level. The change was that Growth and DI were, too, and gave more power than they do now (Growth increased Presence and Running, for example).

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by Blue Angel
I was thinking about that very problem some time ago. It seems to me that once a target is smaller than the size of your hand that the DCV penalty is based on the size of your hand not the target. AKA "The fly swatter affect". This is similar to the Brick using the car to make an AOE attack. Though the attack penalties for the size of your hand is still pretty severe, about -9 OCV.

The trouble there is that your hand may be bigger than the target, but it is not bigger than the target can move in a fraction of a second (as was hinted at earlier in the thread). You swing, and a character the size of an ant is suddenly at the edge of the hex, nowhere near where your hand is. An ant or even a fly cannot do this, and so is built differently.

[DevoDog]

Originally posted by GamePhil
I'm reasonably certain you're mistaken, there: Shrinking has always been 10 points/level. The change was that Growth and DI were, too, and gave more power than they do now (Growth increased Presence and Running, for example).

Nope, 1st Edition of Champions (poorly typeset, missing the page on SFX, and EC's costing a flat rate, give you 3 powers at 1/2 the points in the EC) had Shrinking at 5/level.

The only reason why it's so embedded in my brain is that one of my first characters was a shrinker.

Shrinking and EC's are (IIRC) the two "powers" that changed between 1st and 2nd editions.

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by DevoDog
Nope, 1st Edition of Champions (poorly typeset, missing the page on SFX, and EC's costing a flat rate, give you 3 powers at 1/2 the points in the EC) had Shrinking at 5/level.

The only reason why it's so embedded in my brain is that one of my first characters was a shrinker.

Shrinking and EC's are (IIRC) the two "powers" that changed between 1st and 2nd editions.

Yeah, that's the one I'm talking about. Now I'm going to have to dig through all of these boxes of packed up stuff to PROVE YOU WRONG! Bwah ha ha haha ha!

Or, refresh my memory, as the case may be. At least life has purpose again...

[DevoDog]

Originally posted by GamePhil
Yeah, that's the one I'm talking about. Now I'm going to have to dig through all of these boxes of packed up stuff to PROVE YOU WRONG! Bwah ha ha haha ha!

Or, refresh my memory, as the case may be. At least life has purpose again...

Be sure to let me know. The other difference was in the artwork on the "blank" character sheets. They had two artists who did the sketches used on the 1st edition sheets while for 2nd edition, I believe that Mark Williams did all of the sketches.

[Hugh Neilson]

1st Ed to 2nd Ed had lots of differences. They lost colour art on the cover, got a box and some dice, threw in a map...

Mechanics? OH YEAH!

- Objects (and entangles) got defenses
- Spreading energy blasts was introduced
- bonus damage to HKA's was capped at the DC for the killing attack,
- Active points in a multipower slot were limted to the pool (yes, in 1st Ed I could put lots of limits on and get 120 Active Points from a 40 pt pool)
- Stacking multipowers and elemental controls became illegal (VPP's - oh, they didn't come along until much later)
- Entangles only cost END to throw, not for every phase they stayed up!
- Force Wall became the "wall" we see today
- Drains and Transfers could be applied to POWERS, not just characteristics (there were no other adjustment powers at the time)
- Hardened Defenses were introduced to defend against Armor Piercing (penetrating>? Didn't exist yet)
- Berserk was modified so "in combat" was no longer automatically included (Enraged? What's that?)
- Susceptibilities could be STUN only!
- Competent DNPC's got 50 points (instead of 20)

Ah yes...memories

Hard to believe that was over 20 years ago!


Oh, and the rule book was HUGE - 80 pages, up from 64 pages in 1st Edition (games have changed a bit over the years, haven't they?).

[Hugh Neilson]

Missed one! Missile Deflection became a power instead of a skill (for all those characters who needed a focus or didn't, and to break it up to "thrown/bullets/energy beams".

[And I'm going from a "preview article" from Different Worlds #27, so I don't have the books in front of me, but I think Shrinking stayed 10 points throughout.]

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson
1st Ed to 2nd Ed had lots of differences. They lost colour art on the cover, got a box and some dice, threw in a map...


OMG, I'm a newb! I only have 2nd Edition I have discovered!

I hang my head in shame...

Wonder if they still have that 1st Edition book?

[DevoDog]

Wow! A lot more differences than I remember.

Of course, mind you, this was over 20 years ago.

Minor correction though regarding 2nd Edition: some versions of 2nd edition had a color front cover. All 2nd editions that I've seen had a reference chart on the back while 1st edition had art.

Oh yeah, and I think 2nd edition was the first to have pictures of the sample villains.