New Mechanic: Decoupling SPD from Running

[Erkenfresh]

I've been thinking about how odd it is that SPD affects not only the number of actions one can take in a Phase but also how far they can run. For example:

Character A: 2 SPD, 10" Running (40 points, 20" per Phase)
Character B: 3 SPD, 7" Running (44 points, 21" per Phase)

OK, so B has spent 4 more points in total but with the much added bonus of having that extra speed. It's like character B bought 1 more SPD for just 4 points, not to mention he can cover 1" more of ground per Phase.

What if instead of costing 2 points per 1" of Running, it cost SPD points per 1" of Running. In that case, character A would spend the normal 2 points per inch and character B would be spending 3 points per inch. So now you have:

Character A: 2 SPD, 10" Running (40 points, 20" per Phase)
Character B: 3 SPD, 7" Running (51 points, 21" per Phase)

So now, the difference in costs is closer to where it should be, with character B getting +1 SPD and +1" Running (for the entire Phase) for 11 points.

Most of the time, this isn't a problem but it might get confusing if the SPD of the character changes, either through an Aid, a Drain, or by spending points to increase it. In this case, a simple conversion can adjust Running to the correct value. For example, getting drained from 3 SPD to 2 SPD should increase Running by 50%. For purposes of buying up to a new SPD, the character should sell off all Running at the old cost and buy it back up at the new cost (and I guess keep the leftover points unspent).

I'm only mulling this over because I might want to make detailed vehicle rules and "top speed" should be something that isn't necessarily affected by SPD (which more closely represents the handling of the vehicle). So, popping that nitro should have about the same affect on a SPD 4 car as a SPD 2 car as far as increasing it's top speed, rather than having double effect on the SPD 4 car.

Any input is appreciated!

[Chris Goodwin]

One thing I've seen is having Running cost 1 point for 1" per Turn rather than 2 points for 1" per Phase. Base running would be 12" per Turn. There's variants of this out on the web in various places.

[Just Joe]

For a related discussion, you might want to look here:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47168

You will get the most out of it if you skip over everyone else and just read my posts in the thread. ;)

Note that your suggestion, if I read it right, requires a 2 speed, 6" per phase runner to spend 12 points on running (and 20 on speed?). This will imply a change in the power-level of a given point-level of characters.

This is a subject that interests me considerably, and I have been thinking more recently about the thread linked above, but nevertheless, I'm going to try not to get drawn in any more to this discussion, as I'm trying to make more time for design work. So please forgive me if I do not reply again (or do so only very belatedly).

[Dust Raven]

One idea I've toyed with in the past, well thought about toying with anyway, was to alter the non-combat movement rules. Movement costs what it costs now, and there are no changes in how combat movement works. That's primarily what you're paying for anyway. But non-combat, instead of being a double of your combat movement, is calculated from you combat movement to turn based movement. My first thought was just to have a simple conversion of inches per segment is non-combat, but that allows a normal human to have 72" of running per turn, which is to damn fast. Then I was thinking of something like base of combat movement x 4 for movement per Turn. That makes a normal human equal to what he would be under the normal rules. But that screws up any character with a SPD of 8+, whose combat movement would then be equal to or greater than than his non-combat, which is just wrong. I've tried to find a happy medium, but I only find frustrated and angry mediums. The closest I've got to is that your non-combat is equal to 4x combat movement per Turn or inches xSPD per turn, which ever is greater, but that tends to shaft the high speed characters. In either case, I would divide inches per turn by 12 and have that be inches per segment, which a character can use if he wanted to move non-combat in combat.

[Erkenfresh]

One thing I've seen is having Running cost 1 point for 1" per Turn rather than 2 points for 1" per Phase. Base running would be 12" per Turn. There's variants of this out on the web in various places.

Yes, that's another way of putting the idea. I suppose Drains or Aids to Running would then be expressed in terms of movement per turn instead of per segment, then let the players do the rest of the math.

[Erkenfresh]

One idea I've toyed with in the past, well thought about toying with anyway, was to alter the non-combat movement rules. Movement costs what it costs now, and there are no changes in how combat movement works. That's primarily what you're paying for anyway. But non-combat, instead of being a double of your combat movement, is calculated from you combat movement to turn based movement. My first thought was just to have a simple conversion of inches per segment is non-combat, but that allows a normal human to have 72" of running per turn, which is to damn fast. Then I was thinking of something like base of combat movement x 4 for movement per Turn. That makes a normal human equal to what he would be under the normal rules. But that screws up any character with a SPD of 8+, whose combat movement would then be equal to or greater than than his non-combat, which is just wrong. I've tried to find a happy medium, but I only find frustrated and angry mediums. The closest I've got to is that your non-combat is equal to 4x combat movement per Turn or inches xSPD per turn, which ever is greater, but that tends to shaft the high speed characters. In either case, I would divide inches per turn by 12 and have that be inches per segment, which a character can use if he wanted to move non-combat in combat.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the non-combat movement rules in the RAW. Unless you're talking about how SPD has such a high factor in the top speed of the vehicle outside of combat (which doesn't seem to make much sense).

[Hyper-Man]

...then let the players do the rest of the math.

But that's the real rub. As if HERO math weren't complicated enough (never thought I'd say that!).

When using this option players would then need to buy movement rates easily divisible by 12 to then be able to figure out any movement based DC bonuses.

Unless most of the gaming group are detail junkies (can you say Starfleet Battles-HERO?) I don't see the roleplaying benefit of such a change.

[Erkenfresh]

The benefit is simply balance. When you buy SPD you get a significant increase to movement, which should really be bought up with more Running.

Items like Turbochargers for a car that give an Aid or Succor to Running shouldn't give bigger boosts to cars with more SPD right? I think +10" of Running should affect a SPD 2 car and a SPD 4 car equally. Using the mechanic devised here, the Aid would be defined as adding "20 points" of Running or in other words "20" of Running per Turn" to be divided out amongst the Phases the character or vehicle takes.

Anyhow, not really a big deal. As far as vehicles are concerned, it's a cost issue for my campaign idea where the heroes probably won't pay points (just dollars) for their vehicles. So, it's just a matter of using the right amount of points to determine how much the vehicle costs is money.

[Mike W]

Well, I don't like the idea of Running only costing 1 point per inch because Running has the added benefit of no turn mode. It's much more power than leaping, which costs only 1 point per inch. The main advantage leaping has is that you can actually bypass things in between. But Running's no turn mode more than makes up for it. Plus you don't have to make a hit roll to end up where you want.

I think this is one of those things where you just have to live with the results. Just like everyone gets a 10 STR even though I don't know that many people who could actually lift the 220 pounds a 10 STR lets you lift, so too with Running you can actually Run a bit faster than most people can.

I think the way to keep running speed down would be to crack down on the END expenditure vs. recovery. And start by totaling the inches of move before calculating END expenditure. So the average person moves 24 inches per turn non-combat. That costs 5 END, not 4. And the average person recovers 4 END per turn. So that means the average person can maintain top speed for 20 turns or about 3 1/2 minutes. After that they are dead tired and have to stop to rest. As someone who ran track in high school, that sounds about right to me. The general consensus on the track team was that the half mile(which ran around 2 minutes for the top people and 2 1/2 for the rest of us) was about as long as anyone could maintain anything resembling a dead sprint. That means that the average person has to run at about 80% of top speed to maintain it for an extended period, which is also about right from my experience. I won't claim it's a perfect system, but I think it's as good as we can get. And just about every game system I've ever seen has given the average person credit for being in a bit better physical shape than they really are, especially in modern America, so I'm used to living with that kind of problem. But really, it doesn't come up all THAT often anyway because no one in the game is completely average. Everyone buys up stats so that their Running, CON, SPD, and REC are above the norm, even in a 150 point Heroic game. You like being that little bit faster and the CON is a good way to help all those figured stats. And you always find a way to justify a 3 SPD, for combat if nothing else. So the average person may be slightly faster in the game than in real life, but the important characters are always faster than the average person, so in the end it doesn't matter much.

[Chris Goodwin]

Well, I don't like the idea of Running only costing 1 point per inch

Point of fact: that would be one point per inch per Turn.

[Mike W]

Point of fact: that would be one point per inch per Turn.

Ok, I missed that. But it probably runs the risk of pushing the cost issue the other direction for supers an speedsters are expensive enough to build as it is. Let's say everyone gets 12" or running per turn. A good speedster has, bare minimum, 6 SPD and moves 20 inches per phase. Since that is almost always running, he now has to buy 120 inches of move; that's 108 points! Far too much.

It also means that other movement powers like Flight become so dirt cheap by comparison that they become bargain basement powers everyone will try to afford. Unless, of course you decouple ALL movement powers, which suddenly runs the risk of making your movement at least as expensive as your main attack, which it never was before(unless you were supposed to be so highly mobile, like a speedster, that your movement was an integral part of your attack).

[TheUnknown]

I've always had a problem with spd generating the rate at which you run when it just represents the actions you can make during a given phase so for me I've always assumed if a character is in constant movement then he moves the given amount of Hexes per segement but they can only alter change of course on their phases. Thus the inches x 12 for everyone who says they're in constant motion works out more realistically and effectively. and by the way its easy to caculate mph that way every 1" is 4.5mph thus 10" would be 45mph amd so on.

I start on 12 to move 6" and I declare I'm not stopping then you would move 6" each segement until your phase that would allow you to stop or charge direction. this explains how people run into walls and other objects or people because they could not move on that phase. Dex rolls with mods can be substituted as an abort for purposes of changing direction out of phase.

[Mike Dean]

For low level games (i.e. competent normal games), I've occasionally employed a house rule that points of SPD reduce the characteristic maxima of running. 10" for SPD 2, 8" for SPD 3, and 7" for SPD 4. That sets per-turn movement at 20", 24", and 28" respectively. Players who buy points of SPD can cash in their extra running for a price break. While not a problem-free mechanic ("So, now that I'm SPD 4 my Move Throughs hurt less?"), it does have the benefit of simplicity.

However, I generally don't worry about the relationship between SPD and running in higher level games, and definitely not in superhero games. After all, the entire aim of those games is to be much more capable than a normal person, usually far past the point of realism. SPD, combined with full access to movement, is an important factor in giving your accomplished vigilante the jump on the mook hordes.

Mike

[Hugh Neilson]

It also means that other movement powers like Flight become so dirt cheap by comparison that they become bargain basement powers everyone will try to afford. Unless, of course you decouple ALL movement powers, which suddenly runs the risk of making your movement at least as expensive as your main attack, which it never was before(unless you were supposed to be so highly mobile, like a speedster, that your movement was an integral part of your attack).

I think this system only works if you decouple all movement powers from Speed, halving their cost and making them per turn, rather than per phase. And it would certainly reduce the average per phase movement speed for anyone with a SPD above 2, or alternatively increase the cost of higher movement speeds.

But that's the crux of the issue, isn't it? A 2 SPD character can run at 12" per phase (2x noncombat), which equates to 240 meters per minute, or 14.4 kph (just under 9 miles per hour), on a more or less indefinite basis. That makes Joe Average capable of running a marathon in just under 3 hours, and maintaining that pace more or less forever. That's already pretty fast, given the world record for the marathon [per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon] is just over 2 hours - a time that can be beaten by a 3 SPD character with otherwise standard stats.

Should a 6 SPD martial artist be capable of consistently halving the world record marathon time on a consistent basis? He probably has a 12 REC, so spending 6 END per turn is hardly a major issue.

Now, whether this glitch in the reality comparison makes changing the system worthwhile is another question entirely.

Movethroughs, movebys and similar attacks would presumably also require revision to be based on velocity per turn, such that a character with 12" running per turn adds the same 2d6 velocity damage previously added by moving at 6" per phase on Speed 2.

[Hyper-Man]

An easy adjustment regarding 'normals' and movement:

If normals are assumed to have a base 8 in all primary characteristics instead of base 10 like PC's why not also give them a base 5" of Running as well?

[Hugh Neilson]

An easy adjustment regarding 'normals' and movement:

If normals are assumed to have a base 8 in all primary characteristics instead of base 10 like PC's why not also give them a base 5" of Running as well?

All PC's still meet or beat world marathon records, and a sustained running speed of 12 kph is a lot better than I could do!

[gojira]

Good thread.

I think I'm on the record as preferring to allow non-combat repeated actions, and a few combat repeated actions. OTOH, running itself can be simulated pretty well by just buying lots of non-combat running for people who should be fast sprinters. They'll loose their DCV, but that's a trade off for being able to use that extra speed. Movement in combat is something that I think should be different from raw sprinting speed.

Really, once you get over Speed 3, I think you are firmly in superhero territory and you can ignore realism. If a Speedster with Speed 6 and 10" of Running is way faster than an Olympic athlete, well that's how it should be.

[Andrew Cermak]

But that's the crux of the issue, isn't it? A 2 SPD character can run at 12" per phase (2x noncombat), which equates to 240 meters per minute, or 14.4 kph (just under 9 miles per hour), on a more or less indefinite basis. That makes Joe Average capable of running a marathon in just under 3 hours, and maintaining that pace more or less forever. That's already pretty fast, given the world record for the marathon [per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon] is just over 2 hours - a time that can be beaten by a 3 SPD character with otherwise standard stats.

A marathon seems like an appropriate situation for Long-Term Endurance, which means Joe Average (4 REC, 16 END) will have to pace himself to be able to finish at all.

[Hugh Neilson]

A marathon seems like an appropriate situation for Long-Term Endurance, which means Joe Average (4 REC, 16 END) will have to pace himself to be able to finish at all.

Joe Normal is spending 1 END per phase to maintain his maximum 6" running speed, so 1/2 his REC. How much LTE does that burn per turn? IDHTBIFOM, but IIRC, that is 1 LTE per turn, so he can only keep up the pace for about three minutes. But +1 REC means he's golden and can maintain that pace indefinitely, IIRC.

EDIT: Home with the books now. Joe Normal is losing 1 LTE per five minutes, so he can keep up the pace for about 75 minutes. He's then down 15 LTE, so he can't spend 2 to run full out in both his phases. The LTE rules are unclear whether the character can simply spend only 1 END in one phase every minute, say, to reduce his average. That wouldn't add too much time to Joe Average's marathon.

[Just Joe]

Darn it, Hugh. I was attempting a quick lurk-through, but you sucked me in.

I think that running in-combat and out-of-combat should be thought of primarily in terms of sprinting. Trying to get the END and LTE rules to work for marathons is an admirable goal, but I think it is more important, and should be easier, to get reasonable sprinting rates.

[PhilFleischmann]

Movethroughs, movebys and similar attacks would presumably also require revision to be based on velocity per turn, such that a character with 12" running per turn adds the same 2d6 velocity damage previously added by moving at 6" per phase on Speed 2.
This is the thing that bugs me most, especially with vehicles. I don't think I ever even noticed the problem until I read TUV. A car with 10" "Running" and 4 SPD is going just as fast as a car with 20" of "Running" and 2 SPD. All other things being equal, they ought to do the same damage running into someone (a Move-Thru). But the rules as-is say the 20"&2 SPD does more damage than 10"&4.

[Erkenfresh]

Something else about all this. If I present my players with several different engines they can buy for their cars, the normal rules would say to build it as "+X of Running". But this would mean the very same engine would be 50% faster in a SPD 3 car than a SPD 2. Let's take it a bit further shall we? A vehicle can decelerate at 5" per hex of movement, up to the combat running per Phase. Let's say vehicle A has 30" of Running and SPD 2 while vehicle B has 30" of Running and SPD 4. Both vehicles are going the full 4x non-combat velocity of 120" and the drivers of both cars decide to slam on the brakes to a dead stop at the same time. On Segment 12, both vehicles drop by 30" to 90" of velocity. Now, here's where it gets strange. On Segment 3, vehicle B will drop down to 60" while vehicle A remains at 90". Continuing this out, vehicle A will come to a stop one full turn after vehicle B does. Now, why should the SPD of the car affect how the brakes work? Maybe that's just what SPD is supposed to mean, but if that's true here's what you get for buying SPD for a vehicle:

1. Faster top speed
2. Faster acceleration
3. Faster deceleration
4. Better handling
5. More bonus from Aids to Running
6. More attacks/maneuvers per Turn

It seems like too much for just 10 points per SPD. Buying 1-5 from above without increasing SPD would cost well over 10 points to go from an effective SPD 2 to SPD 3, and that's without the bonus of #6.

Now, I can see arguments against all of this for a superhero campaign. You probably don't want to spend 120 points for your SPD 6 speedster to run 120" per Turn. It would make the rest of the character a bit point-strained. And superhero campaigns aren't exactly striving for realism.

[Hugh Neilson]

Darn it, Hugh. I was attempting a quick lurk-through, but you sucked me in.

I think that running in-combat and out-of-combat should be thought of primarily in terms of sprinting. Trying to get the END and LTE rules to work for marathons is an admirable goal, but I think it is more important, and should be easier, to get reasonable sprinting rates.

Funny...I always think of sprinters as Pushing their running somehow - how else can they be tired after "only" running 100 yards (about 50", which in Hero terms, Joe Six Pack can manage in a bit over 4 phases, so under 30 seconds, and be down less than half his END). Now maybe if we applied something similar to the LTE rules to reduce a character's ability to take recoveries...

[Mike W]

I think this system only works if you decouple all movement powers from Speed, halving their cost and making them per turn, rather than per phase. And it would certainly reduce the average per phase movement speed for anyone with a SPD above 2, or alternatively increase the cost of higher movement speeds.

But that's the crux of the issue, isn't it? A 2 SPD character can run at 12" per phase (2x noncombat), which equates to 240 meters per minute, or 14.4 kph (just under 9 miles per hour), on a more or less indefinite basis. That makes Joe Average capable of running a marathon in just under 3 hours, and maintaining that pace more or less forever. That's already pretty fast, given the world record for the marathon [per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon] is just over 2 hours - a time that can be beaten by a 3 SPD character with otherwise standard stats.

Should a 6 SPD martial artist be capable of consistently halving the world record marathon time on a consistent basis? He probably has a 12 REC, so spending 6 END per turn is hardly a major issue.

Now, whether this glitch in the reality comparison makes changing the system worthwhile is another question entirely.

Movethroughs, movebys and similar attacks would presumably also require revision to be based on velocity per turn, such that a character with 12" running per turn adds the same 2d6 velocity damage previously added by moving at 6" per phase on Speed 2.

ACtually, Joe Average CAN'T run a 3 hour marathon because the long term END rules(which I've never seen anyone use) would prevent him from finishing the race. According to the long term END rules, if your END used/REC = 1(which is what it is for Joe Average), then you burn 1 END per minute - so Joe Average can maintain his top running speed of 24" per turn for 20 minutes. At 5 turns per minute, he's covering 240m per minute which, which means he runs about 3 miles in those 20 minutes. That's a bit fast for Joe Average but just about everyone on my high school cross country team could do it - even the freshman who would naturally be slower.

As far as sustained running speed goes, the average person at a brisk walk does 1 mile in 20 minutes and can probably keep it up for an hour or so. Anyone in good shape(say a high school athlete) can maintain 12kph - about 8 minute mile for about 3 miles. After that, it starts to drop off unless you're a runner. In high school, I could run 6 miles in about 40-45 minutes as an above average freshman distance runner. The top guys could do it in about 35 minutes.

All in all, this is one of those things I'm prepared to live with. I've never been crazy about the way running speeds convert for most characters when you start factoring in SPD and the fact that almost every character needs 12-15 inches of combat movement. I mean, the average super doesn't really need to be able to run 150 inches(non-combat) in a turn. That translates out to 1500m in one minute, which is basically 55mph. But really, I just think that it's more trouble than it's worth to go to the hassle of converting the whole thing over since as various people have pointed out, you would have to decouple ALL of the movement powers, reassign their point values, devlop new rules for turning and for any combat maneuver that had a velocity or FMove element like move by, move through, or flying dodge. That's a LOT of work just to bring running speeds into line when most people don't know how fast they're actually going anyway.

[SteveZilla]

"In non-combat situations, everyone is assumed to act at SPD 2 at all times, unless the circumstances require them to use their full SPDs." -- 5RE, p 357.

Though I'll bet that several people object strongly to this rule. They might claim that it shortchanges those who bought lots of SPD.

To those I would say that you might benefit from reading the section on "Non-Combat Time" on p 348 of 5RE. :) Every second of a PC's life isn't spent in Combat Time.

[Andrew Cermak]

The LTE rules are unclear whether the character can simply spend only 1 END in one phase every minute, say, to reduce his average. That wouldn't add too much time to Joe Average's marathon.


A literal reading of the rules suggests that if the GM invokes the LTE rules, then if in any 1 Turn he spends half his REC in END he invokes the LTE loss.

Since the LTE loss for that level of activity is 1/five minutes, I'd interpret that to mean that Joe would have to go five straight minutes of *not* spending 2 END in a Turn to avoid the LTE loss for that interval.

Under those rules, Joe may as well just run full out for 75 minutes, and thereafter run 1 Phase a Turn. Using Joe Average's actual noncombat Running speed of 10" (5ER 345), I calculate him taking about 5.65 hours to finish. Since marathon courses often shut down at the 6 hour mark, that's a fairly unimpressive pace.

[Hugh Neilson]

"In non-combat situations, everyone is assumed to act at SPD 2 at all times, unless the circumstances require them to use their full SPDs." -- 5RE, p 357.

To those I would say that you might benefit from reading the section on "Non-Combat Time" on p 348 of 5RE. :) Every second of a PC's life isn't spent in Combat Time.

That seems to render many of the concerns irrelevant, although I can certainly see arguments over when cirumstances require use of full Speeds. For example, p 348 refers to switching to combat time for a car chase. This could reasonably be extrapolated to a chase on foot, and from there to a race, whether a 100 yard dash or a marathon.


A literal reading of the rules suggests that if the GM invokes the LTE rules, then if in any 1 Turn he spends half his REC in END he invokes the LTE loss.

Since the LTE loss for that level of activity is 1/five minutes, I'd interpret that to mean that Joe would have to go five straight minutes of *not* spending 2 END in a Turn to avoid the LTE loss for that interval.


I can read it that way, but I don't believe it's the only rational interpretation, or even the most logical. It would extend the LTE rules well beyond periods of sustained physical activity if taken literally, since most characters in combat spend more than their REC in a typical turn, much less half their REC.

I'm curious as to the official stance, so I've posted the question on the Rules Q forum.


Under those rules, Joe may as well just run full out for 75 minutes, and thereafter run 1 Phase a Turn. Using Joe Average's actual noncombat Running speed of 10" (5ER 345), I calculate him taking about 5.65 hours to finish. Since marathon courses often shut down at the 6 hour mark, that's a fairly unimpressive pace.

The reduced running rate helps the situation somewhat for Joe Normal. That was a suggestion offered earlier as well. It does little for any heroic character, however, who likely has at least a 5 REC and can sustain a 6" run at 2 SPD indefinitely.

[Hugh Neilson]

ACtually, Joe Average CAN'T run a 3 hour marathon because the long term END rules(which I've never seen anyone use) would prevent him from finishing the race. According to the long term END rules, if your END used/REC = 1(which is what it is for Joe Average), then you burn 1 END per minute

He burns 1 END per phase = 2 per turn. Noncombat multiples don't multiply END usage.


All in all, this is one of those things I'm prepared to live with.
************************************************** ******
But really, I just think that it's more trouble than it's worth to go to the hassle of converting the whole thing over since as various people have pointed out, you would have to decouple ALL of the movement powers, reassign their point values, devlop new rules for turning and for any combat maneuver that had a velocity or FMove element like move by, move through, or flying dodge. That's a LOT of work just to bring running speeds into line when most people don't know how fast they're actually going anyway.

I'm inclined to agree it's not worth the hassle. While the "run a marathon" results may be irrational, running a marathon isn't exactly a typical game event. Invoking the "2 SPD in noncombat time" rule will slow down those noncombat speeds considerably.

[Hugh Neilson]

That was quick.


If a character uses END in varying amounts from Turn to Turn over a period of time, typically Long-Term END loss is calculated using the largest amount of END he spends in any given Turn. For example, if a character has REC 4 and over the course of a minute uses 6, 8, 2, 1, and 4 END in each of the Turns, his (END in Turn/REC) equals 2 (8/4), so he loses 1 LTE per Turn. However, the GM may adjust this as he sees fit; for instance, in some cases the GM may average the amount of END spent per Turn to make the LTE calculation.

While I don't agree with Steve's logic, that's the official rule.

EDIT: OK, maybe it's not the official rule. I eagerly await the promised Heroglyphs article.

[SteveZilla]

That seems to render many of the concerns irrelevant, although I can certainly see arguments over when circumstances require use of full Speeds. For example, p 348 refers to switching to combat time for a car chase. This could reasonably be extrapolated to a chase on foot, and from there to a race, whether a 100 yard dash or a marathon.

And from there getting to work on time in rush hour, and getting home to watch one's favorite TV show. I could probably go on... ;)

"Unless it looks like there's going to be a fight (or some other sequence you need to detail precisely, like a car chase), you don't have to be exact about things like time or distance." - 5RE, p 348.

I don't think it is reasonable to extend the description of "chase" to "race". In a race, you're not pursuing, fleeing, tracking, or tailing someone.

Like many things in a campaign, the GM controls when Combat Time is used, and when it's not. Kinda makes buying extra Non-Combat Multiples or Megascale on one's movement more attractive, doesn't it? ;)

[PhilFleischmann]

Like many things in a campaign, the GM controls when Combat Time is used, and when it's not. Kinda makes buying extra Non-Combat Multiples or Megascale on one's movement more attractive, doesn't it? ;)
Maybe not. If I have a 5 SPD and 6" Running, I'm running 6"x5= 30" per turn Combat Speed, but if I switch to Non-Combat, I'm going 12"x2= 24" per turn.

I guess non-Combat movement is just a way to save END, rather than a way to move faster. (Unless you increase the multiple.)

[PhilFleischmann]

If a character uses END in varying amounts from Turn to Turn over a period of time, typically Long-Term END loss is calculated using the largest amount of END he spends in any given Turn. For example, if a character has REC 4 and over the course of a minute uses 6, 8, 2, 1, and 4 END in each of the Turns, his (END in Turn/REC) equals 2 (8/4), so he loses 1 LTE per Turn. However, the GM may adjust this as he sees fit; for instance, in some cases the GM may average the amount of END spent per Turn to make the LTE calculation.
That is a little wierd. He loses 1 LTE even on the turn where he only spent 1 END?

[Hugh Neilson]

"Unless it looks like there's going to be a fight (or some other sequence you need to detail precisely, like a car chase), you don't have to be exact about things like time or distance." - 5RE, p 348.

I don't think it is reasonable to extend the description of "chase" to "race". In a race, you're not pursuing, fleeing, tracking, or tailing someone.

I suspect olympic marathoners will suggest that the detail of who comes in first better be precise, meaning time and distance should be measured more exactly.

[Hugh Neilson]

That is a little wierd. He loses 1 LTE even on the turn where he only spent 1 END?


In reviewing your questions, I realized that because they’re so rarely used, the LTE rules haven’t really been thoroughly explored and explained the way they ought to be. So if you don’t mind, I’m going to defer answering in favor of a HEROglyphs column on the subject, where I can delve into the matter thoroughly. Thanx for giving me such a great idea for a column!

So I think that's not yet Steve's final answer.

[SteveZilla]

I suspect Olympic marathoners will suggest that the detail of who comes in first better be precise, meaning time and distance should be measured more exactly.

How often does a GM run (pun intended :D) an entire marathon in a game? I didn't say (or mean to imply, if I did) that a GM couldn't do this, just that the GM determines the "time scale" used for any scene in the game.

Also, Hero System is not The Ultimate Reality Toolkit. It may not model some things accurately, or with enough granularity to satisfy those who want it to be TURT. I haven't seen a RPG system that does a good (realistic) job of handling massed movement like a marathon, a bike race, or a car race. For example, I saw this problem firsthand at a convention. Someone was using Car Wars for a Grand Prix race. Real life is not divided into Turns and Phases -- it happens millisecond by millisecond, and to all the participants at the same time.

[Astragaal]

Has inches/segment dissapeared as a mechanic?

Cant remember if 4th used it, but Danger international, Justice Inc and other original used it for vechiles.

[Hugh Neilson]

How often does a GM run (pun intended :D) an entire marathon in a game? I didn't say (or mean to imply, if I did) that a GM couldn't do this, just that the GM determines the "time scale" used for any scene in the game.

Also, Hero System is not The Ultimate Reality Toolkit. It may not model some things accurately, or with enough granularity to satisfy those who want it to be TURT. I haven't seen a RPG system that does a good (realistic) job of handling massed movement like a marathon, a bike race, or a car race. For example, I saw this problem firsthand at a convention. Someone was using Car Wars for a Grand Prix race. Real life is not divided into Turns and Phases -- it happens millisecond by millisecond, and to all the participants at the same time.

Actually, a game that centered around such races would presumably have enough granularity to make minor differences matter. As you say, how often does one run a footrace of any sort? Not very often! Given that, there isn't a crying need for rules that can address all the subtleties and variances in characters' abilities to run such a footrace,

[Chris Goodwin]

Has inches/segment dissapeared as a mechanic?

Cant remember if 4th used it, but Danger international, Justice Inc and other original used it for vechiles.

It's still used in falling, but not anywhere else.

[Mike W]

He burns 1 END per phase = 2 per turn. Noncombat multiples don't multiply END usage.



I'm inclined to agree it's not worth the hassle. While the "run a marathon" results may be irrational, running a marathon isn't exactly a typical game event. Invoking the "2 SPD in noncombat time" rule will slow down those noncombat speeds considerably.

I don't see why the non-combat multiplier wouldn't apply when you're using it,. Is there anyplace it specifically says this? In comjbat, you aren't paying the END for the non-combat movement because you aren't using it. But if you aren't in combat you ARE using the movement, so why wouldn't you pay END for it?

[SteveZilla]

I don't see why the non-combat multiplier wouldn't apply when you're using it,. Is there anyplace it specifically says this? In comjbat, you aren't paying the END for the non-combat movement because you aren't using it. But if you aren't in combat you ARE using the movement, so why wouldn't you pay END for it?

5RE, p 123. Under "Endurance". I guess because NCMs, despite being like Adders, are an exception?

[Hugh Neilson]

I don't see why the non-combat multiplier wouldn't apply when you're using it,. Is there anyplace it specifically says this? In comjbat, you aren't paying the END for the non-combat movement because you aren't using it. But if you aren't in combat you ARE using the movement, so why wouldn't you pay END for it?

Bless that 5er index, Steve Long! I pretty much always find the answer in a minute or two.


Unless otherwise noted in a Movement Power's description, all movement powers cost END at the rate of 1 END per 10 active points in the Movement Power.
************************************************** *******
If a character moves at Noncombat velocites, the END cost equals the END he uses to move at Combat velocities - a character with Flight 15" (30 Active Points) and a x8 Noncombat Movement multiple (total of Flight 120") only spends 3 END per Phase.

I blanked out some material on free running, leaping, etc. also counting for deternining END.

Really, how could anyone use high noncombat velocities if a 32x multiple for that character above (480" per phase) meant spending 96 END per phase?

[SteveZilla]

Really, how could anyone use high noncombat velocities if a 32x multiple for that character above (480" per phase) meant spending 96 END per phase?

Fuel Charges? :D

Seriously though, I think some of the misconception was that the NCMs would add their Active Points to the Active Points of the movement power being used to determine the END Cost. Like 10" Flight, x32 NCM (40 Active Points -- the first x2 is free) feels like it would cost 4 END to use all 40 APs.

But as shown in two different places in 5RE, the NCMs themselves cost no END to use. It just takes a while to get up to full NCM velocity (and the same to stop ;)).

[Hyper-Man]

You guys haven't checked the errata for 5er

I asked Steve L. about this a while back:
http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29753

Hi Steve,

The previous poster raised a serious question. I read all the related 5ER pages that you mentioned and I can't figure out which example has precedence. Unless I am completely missing some key piece of information or haven't had enough caffeine, one of the examples is giving the incorrect END cost but I can't figure out which one.

Given that the following 15"/x8NCM/3 END example build is also used on page 364:
Quote:
On p123, under Endurance, it's noted that a character with 15" of Flight and a x8 NCM would pay 3 END per phase.

1. Are these examples actually wrong? Should the character be paying 4 End per phase?
2. Would a more specific example with included active points help? If I have a character with Flight 20" [40 active] with a x32 Non-Combat Multiple [+20 active for a total of 60 active] Does it cost 4 or 6 End per phase to use at combat or non-combat speeds?

Thanks in advance,

HM

Steve L. replied:

It's just an errata. It should be 4 END per Phase due to the Active Point cost of 40.

[Hugh Neilson]

HM's comment still moves us to the same 4 END regardless of whether the character is moving 15" in combat, or 120" in noncombat. The only clarification is that the adder does, in fact, cost END based on its own AP (not the movement speed) regardless of whether it is being used or not.

[SteveZilla]

It hasn't been put into the 5th Ed errata for some reason.

http://www.herogames.com/SupportFAQs/errata5ER.htm

HM, what examples were you referencing in your question to Steve Long? I can't find any place in 5RE that directly contradicts the "NCMs don't cost END".

[SteveZilla]

After a quick search using "NCM END", I found this question/answer:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29740&highlight=NCM+END

Which means that in 5th ed (revised), NCMs are adders and follow all adders rules. I.e., they add their Active Point cost to the END cost of using the power regardless of they're being used or not. Movement Powers with extra NCMs in a Multipower Flexible Slot don't require reserve points if not being used, but still increases the END cost of the power.

Which I think means that a character with 20" Flight x128 NCM has to spend 3 END just to hover. IMO it may be better to buy some Scaleable Megascale as a Naked Advantage instead of buying NCMs.

[Hyper-Man]

After a quick search using "NCM END", I found this question/answer:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29740&highlight=NCM+END

Which means that in 5th ed (revised), NCMs are adders and follow all adders rules. I.e., they add their Active Point cost to the END cost of using the power regardless of they're being used or not. Movement Powers with extra NCMs in a Multipower Flexible Slot don't require reserve points if not being used, but still increases the END cost of the power.

Which I think means that a character with 20" Flight x128 NCM has to spend 3 END just to hover. IMO it may be better to buy some Scaleable Megascale as a Naked Advantage instead of buying NCMs.

This is how I've approached it in the past (notes assume a SPD 6 character)

60 Flight Multipower: 60-point reserve
6u 1) Trick Flight: Flight 15", Variable Advantage (+1/2 Advantages; Combat Acceleration/Deceleration (+1/4), IPE Hearing (+1/4), MegaScale 1" = 1 or 10 km (+1/4 or +1/2), No Turn Mode (+1/4), Reduced End (+1/4 or +1/2), Sideways Maneuverability Half Or Full Velocity (+1/4 or +1/2), Usable By Other (+1/4), Usable As Gliding, Running or Swimmng (+1/4).; +1) [Notes: Combat Velocity ~34 mph (VF=5). MegaScale Minimum Velocity = 500" (~1125 mph, VF=16), Absolute Maximum = 75,000" (~168,750 MPH, ~Mach 225, ~94 Miles/phase)(@6 End/phase for about 1 minute), No Turn Mode Sustainable Maximum ~Mach 8, Absolute Sustainable Maximum ~Mach 75 (@2 End/phase could circle the Equator in < 10 minutes).] - END=6
6u 2) Combat Flight: Flight 20", x32 Noncombat [Notes: Combat Velocity of ~45 mph (VF=6), Non-Combat Velocity of ~1440 mph (VF=16): Bridges gap between Trick Flight's Combat maximum and Megascale minimum. Move By Damage is STR/2 + (VF)d6. Move Through OCV penalty is -(VF) and Damage is STR + (VF)d6. The Velocity Factor value (5ER pg 436) is equal to the (relative) Velocity Based DCV value (5ER page 364).] - END=6

[Mike W]

5RE, p 123. Under "Endurance". I guess because NCMs, despite being like Adders, are an exception?

OK, I can see that. And the high level NCMs would get hard to use. I guess that's what I get for trying to do this stuff very late at night(and often with a couple adult beverages in me) :)

Still though, I think that if we get back to the original idea of the thread, we ultimately find that while HERO(as is not uncommon) does not model "normal" people very well because it gives them too much credit, the PCs(at any level of play) and their opposition, are sufficiently beyond them to make it irrelevant.

[Dust Raven]

After a quick search using "NCM END", I found this question/answer:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29740&highlight=NCM+END

Which means that in 5th ed (revised), NCMs are adders and follow all adders rules. I.e., they add their Active Point cost to the END cost of using the power regardless of they're being used or not. Movement Powers with extra NCMs in a Multipower Flexible Slot don't require reserve points if not being used, but still increases the END cost of the power.

Which I think means that a character with 20" Flight x128 NCM has to spend 3 END just to hover. IMO it may be better to buy some Scaleable Megascale as a Naked Advantage instead of buying NCMs.

I've never liked that rule. If you have an EB 10d6, and only use 8d6 of it, you only spend 4 END, not 5. but if I have Flight 20" with a x8 NCM, I do have to pay 5 END if I'm only using the 20" in combat. House rule time!

[SteveZilla]

I've never liked that rule. If you have an EB 10d6, and only use 8d6 of it, you only spend 4 END, not 5. but if I have Flight 20" with a x8 NCM, I do have to pay 5 END if I'm only using the 20" in combat. House rule time!

Me too. Though that makes NCMs different from other adders, which always add to the END cost (like Force Field with the Protects Carried Items adder).

Will your house rule be that NCMs (and maybe all adders) only cost END when actually being used, or go back to 4th ed.'s NCMs don't cost END at all?

[PhilFleischmann]

Unless otherwise noted in a Movement Power's description, all movement powers cost END at the rate of 1 END per 10 active points in the Movement Power.
Which means that

Running, Flight, Teleport cost 1 END/5"
Leaping, Swimming, Swinging cost 1 END/10"
and Tunneling costs 1 END/2" or more if you can Tunnel through higher DEF materials, and 1 END more if you can close the tunnel behind you (unless this is another exception to the "Adders always cost END" rule).

Which is something that I hadn't noticed before. I've been using 1 END/5" for all movement types. Or did this change between FREd and 5ER?

[schir1964]

Which is something that I hadn't noticed before. I've been using 1 END/5" for all movement types. Or did this change between FREd and 5ER?
Yes, Hero 4th Edition used 1 END/5" of movement, but Hero 5th Edition changed it to 1 END/10 Active Points.

- Christopher Mullins

[Dust Raven]

Me too. Though that makes NCMs different from other adders, which always add to the END cost (like Force Field with the Protects Carried Items adder).

Will your house rule be that NCMs (and maybe all adders) only cost END when actually being used, or go back to 4th ed.'s NCMs don't cost END at all?
It makes it the same as other Adders in my campaign. If you're not forced to use the Adder, you're not forced to pay END for it if you don't use it. I consider it an official rule, and what's in the book is just a fancy published house rule. :)

[SteveZilla]

To me, that is the most logical way. You pay END for what you use, and only what you use.

With a certain few exceptions, I tend to hold the book above house rules. Partly because I figure a lot more thought (and testing) has gone into the book than into any one person's (or group's) house rules.

Though I realize that if I'm going to play in game X, I will need to abide by game X's house rules (or convince them to change/discard the house rules).

Several times in my total Hero System/Champions history I've run across house rules that made no sense and the only justification for it was "That's how we've always done it". :thumbdown To which I say "Then you should still be using stone knives and bearskins by that reasoning." :yes:

[PhilFleischmann]

Yes, Hero 4th Edition used 1 END/5" of movement, but Hero 5th Edition changed it to 1 END/10 Active Points.
Gasp! :eek: You're right! :doi: Holy cow! :idjit: I've been doing it wrong this whole time! :o Please don't tell anyone! :angst:

But I have to agree with Dust Raven and others on the "Don't pay END for Adders you aren't using" rule. And I would apply it to other Adders besides NCM. F'rinstance: You shouldn't have to pay END for Position Shift if you're not using it, nor for the Extra DEF you can Tunnel through if you aren't using it, or the option to Fill in the Tunnel behind you if you aren't doing so.

So if GopherMan has 6" Tunneling, +4 DEF (10 DEF Total Tunnelable), +Fill In Behind, but he's only currently tunneling through normal dirt (less than 6 DEF) at his full normal speed and not filling in the tunnel behind him, he pays 3 END per phase. For an additional 1 END/phase, he can fill in the tunnel behind him. And if he comes across some DEF 10 material he wants to tunnel through, it will cost him another 1 END/phase.

[Hyper-Man]

I guess it's up to me to be devil's advocate here...

back to the original non-combat multiple example.

let's use the F-14 and it's swept wing to represent the non-com or speed of sound capability.

What happens if you build an F-14 that doesn't have the 'sweeping' capability? Instead the wing is constructed in a more solid (and probably lighter) non-swept configuration. Now, assuming everything else is the same, the new plane has lost some high speed capability but also gained some slow speed performance due to the weight loss.

This is very similar to:

40 Flight 20" END=4
vs
60 Flight 20", x32 Noncombat - END=6

To do otherwise makes Adders too much like Naked Advantages.

[SteveZilla]

let's use the F-14 and it's swept wing to represent the non-com or speed of sound capability.

What happens if you build an F-14 that doesn't have the 'sweeping' capability? Instead the wing is constructed in a more solid (and probably lighter) non-swept configuration. Now, assuming everything else is the same, the new plane has lost some high speed capability but also gained some slow speed performance due to the weight loss.

This is very similar to:

40 Flight 20" END=4
vs
60 Flight 20", x32 Noncombat - END=6

To do otherwise makes Adders too much like Naked Advantages.

I'm not sure if you are in favor of Adders only costing END when they are used, or going the way they are written (costing END all the time)?

Can you elaborate on how "doing otherwise" makes them too much like Naked Advantages?

[Hyper-Man]

I'm not sure if you are in favor of Adders only costing END when they are used, or going the way they are written (costing END all the time)?

Can you elaborate on how "doing otherwise" makes them too much like Naked Advantages?

I guess I am in favor of them costing END all the time. Naked Advantages would not since by definition they don't have to be used when the Power (or Characteristic) they modify is used.

[SteveZilla]

I guess I am in favor of them costing END all the time. Naked Advantages would not since by definition they don't have to be used when the Power (or Characteristic) they modify is used.

Adders don't have to be used all the time either. A "Costs END even when not being used" for Adders would mean that even if one's Force wall can be made opaque, but currently isn't, the power still costs more END than normal? It also means the FW's END cost is irrelevant to being opaque or not.

I am in favor of keeping the END usage calculations simple -- one pays END for what they are using (if it costs END, of course). There are some significant differences between this rule for adders, and the book rules for Naked Advantages.

Naked Advantages can't be put in a framework, even in the same slot as the power they are for. Adders must be part of the power they are for -- they can't be bought "naked".

[Checkmate]

Something else about all this. If I present my players with several different engines they can buy for their cars, the normal rules would say to build it as "+X of Running". But this would mean the very same engine would be 50% faster in a SPD 3 car than a SPD 2. Let's take it a bit further shall we? A vehicle can decelerate at 5" per hex of movement, up to the combat running per Phase. Let's say vehicle A has 30" of Running and SPD 2 while vehicle B has 30" of Running and SPD 4. Both vehicles are going the full 4x non-combat velocity of 120" and the drivers of both cars decide to slam on the brakes to a dead stop at the same time. On Segment 12, both vehicles drop by 30" to 90" of velocity. Now, here's where it gets strange. On Segment 3, vehicle B will drop down to 60" while vehicle A remains at 90". Continuing this out, vehicle A will come to a stop one full turn after vehicle B does. Now, why should the SPD of the car affect how the brakes work?...snip

I'm doing a quick lurk-through so sorry if this has been mentioned, but I wanted to comment on this:

A Farrari doing 100mph can stop in less distance than a Ugo going 60mph (if you can actually get a a Ugo to do 60). I actually like this part of the whole speed/running thing. IMO a car with a higher speed is a higher performance car. Sure other cars can go as fast, but they don't handle as well. Your example simulates that perfectly.

[Dust Raven]

I guess it's up to me to be devil's advocate here...

back to the original non-combat multiple example.

let's use the F-14 and it's swept wing to represent the non-com or speed of sound capability.

What happens if you build an F-14 that doesn't have the 'sweeping' capability? Instead the wing is constructed in a more solid (and probably lighter) non-swept configuration. Now, assuming everything else is the same, the new plane has lost some high speed capability but also gained some slow speed performance due to the weight loss.

This is very similar to:

40 Flight 20" END=4
vs
60 Flight 20", x32 Noncombat - END=6

To do otherwise makes Adders too much like Naked Advantages.

And the F-14 uses the same fuel to go 20" as it does to go 640"? Somehow I doubt it.

[Dust Raven]

Naked Advantages can't be put in a framework, even in the same slot as the power they are for. Adders must be part of the power they are for -- they can't be bought "naked".

Of course, we gotta be sure we know what's an Adder and what's not. Is the bonus to OCV or ECV with Missile Deflection or Mind Scan Adders, or just CSLs? What about Fixed Locations with Teleport? They must not be, because I've seen published characters buy them separately from their Teleport. Really makes me wonder what else is an Adder and what else isn't.

If you buy an Entangle that has extra dice of BODY, do you always have to pay END for those extra dice even when not using them, while not having to pay END for the regular dice you have if you don't use all of them? Where's the sense in that?

Anyway, I'm done ranting now. I know this system forwards and backwards and sometimes it gives me whiplash.

[SteveZilla]

Of course, we gotta be sure we know what's an Adder and what's not.

Naturally. :)


Is the bonus to OCV or ECV with Missile Deflection or Mind Scan Adders, or just CSLs?

Missile Deflection bonuses are 2 pt. Combat Skill Levels, and thus are not Adders, even with the GM's permission to put them in the same framework slot as the Missile Deflection (5RE, p208).

A Mind Scan Roll Bonus (ECV) is an adder (5RE, p207).


What about Fixed Locations with Teleport? They must not be, because I've seen published characters buy them separately from their Teleport.

Fixed and Floating locations for Teleportation are somewhat unique. They are purchased separately from any & all purchases of Teleportation (and are usable by all). They don't have to have the same Power Modifiers as any of the Teleportation powers, but can have their own, if appropriate. They cannot be put inside any framework, but do add their Active Points to those of the Teleportation power being used for END calculation. Reduced/Zero END bought on the Teleportation power *does* affect the Location's APs (5re, p233-234).


Really makes me wonder what else is an Adder and what else isn't.

Well, if it's in the "Adder" section of each power, it's probably an Adder, and if not, then it's likely not. :)


If you buy an Entangle that has extra dice of BODY, do you always have to pay END for those extra dice even when not using them, while not having to pay END for the regular dice you have if you don't use all of them? Where's the sense in that?

Additional DEF or Body for an Entangle are Adders, and thus don't have to be used each time the Power is used. Keeping to the "House Rule" of only paying END for what is being used keeps the Logic of how END costs are determined in the first place.


Anyway, I'm done ranting now. I know this system forwards and backwards and sometimes it gives me whiplash.

Me too! No more ranting for me! I mean it! Really! :D

I know it fairly well as well. :) Thought I just tend to get double vision, which costs me +5 points. ;)

[SteveZilla]

And the F-14 uses the same fuel to go 20" as it does to go 640"? Somehow I doubt it.

No, it would cost 4 END to go 20" in Combat, or 40" Non-Combat. Because of rounding, it would still cost 4 END to go 80" Non-Combat. But 160" and 320" Non-Combat would cost 5 END, and 6 END to top out at 640".

I would like to make a point on something brought up in a previous post. The F/X of the Non-Combat Multiples is irrelevant. It can be NoX, Afterburners, Swing-Wings, or Dynamic Engine Airflow Control -- it doesn't affect how it's used or it's END cost.

[Hyper-Man]

And the F-14 uses the same fuel to go 20" as it does to go 640"? Somehow I doubt it.

The analogy was not a direct 1 to 1.

The examples were not intended to be accurate models of actual aircraft. If that were the goal I would probably build a normal F-14's flight with the extra non-com portion as a 'naked adder' with an increased END limitation. The non-swept example would just have a higher multiple of increased END.

[SteveZilla]

The analogy was not a direct 1 to 1.

The examples were not intended to be accurate models of actual aircraft. If that were the goal I would probably build a normal F-14's flight with the extra non-com portion as a 'naked adder' with an increased END limitation. The non-swept example would just have a higher multiple of increased END.

Just a little nitpick: That would be a Partially-Limited Power, and not a 'naked adder' :)

[Sean Waters]

I've been thinking about how odd it is that SPD affects not only the number of actions one can take in a Phase but also how far they can run. For example:

Character A: 2 SPD, 10" Running (40 points, 20" per Phase)
Character B: 3 SPD, 7" Running (44 points, 21" per Phase)

OK, so B has spent 4 more points in total but with the much added bonus of having that extra speed. It's like character B bought 1 more SPD for just 4 points, not to mention he can cover 1" more of ground per Phase.

What if instead of costing 2 points per 1" of Running, it cost SPD points per 1" of Running. In that case, character A would spend the normal 2 points per inch and character B would be spending 3 points per inch. So now you have:

Character A: 2 SPD, 10" Running (40 points, 20" per Phase)
Character B: 3 SPD, 7" Running (51 points, 21" per Phase)

So now, the difference in costs is closer to where it should be, with character B getting +1 SPD and +1" Running (for the entire Phase) for 11 points.

Most of the time, this isn't a problem but it might get confusing if the SPD of the character changes, either through an Aid, a Drain, or by spending points to increase it. In this case, a simple conversion can adjust Running to the correct value. For example, getting drained from 3 SPD to 2 SPD should increase Running by 50%. For purposes of buying up to a new SPD, the character should sell off all Running at the old cost and buy it back up at the new cost (and I guess keep the leftover points unspent).

I'm only mulling this over because I might want to make detailed vehicle rules and "top speed" should be something that isn't necessarily affected by SPD (which more closely represents the handling of the vehicle). So, popping that nitro should have about the same affect on a SPD 4 car as a SPD 2 car as far as increasing it's top speed, rather than having double effect on the SPD 4 car.

Any input is appreciated!


No really straightforward answer other than to have everyone in the campaign use SPD 4 (or whatever) BUT...

Buy your movement powers normally at the normal cost. Use this figure for movethrough and moveby damage.

Multiply the movement total by 4 and divide by your speed. Use this for movement per phase.

Now everyone gets the same cost/utility regardess of speed (actually high speed characters have a slight advantage with aceleration, but it is hardly worth mentioning).

Adjustment powers are the problem here. Either do it the simple way (drains and aids work off the per phase move as a base) or the more accurate way (multiply the aid or drain by 4/Your SPD) i.e. you are draining the (movement x4) figure: fair enough as this is the same for everyone.

[Sean Waters]

And the F-14 uses the same fuel to go 20" as it does to go 640"? Somehow I doubt it.

The problem here is that adders add to the power for END whether or not they are in use (I think).

What you could do is build the NCM with a big increase in END cost when it is in use to simulate the larger fuel use.

OTOH you are probably running it off a fuel charge anyway, so moveing fast orjinking about all over the place will come to the same in the end: 4 hours flight time (or whatever)

[SteveZilla]

Adjustment powers are the problem here. Either do it the simple way (drains and aids work off the per phase move as a base) or the more accurate way (multiply the aid or drain by 4/Your SPD) i.e. you are draining the (movement x4) figure: fair enough as this is the same for everyone.

What about changes to the character's Speed? Either through +/- adjustment powers, or though direct PC control (like in a Multipower)?

Would casting Haste (+4 Speed, UBO, Continuing Charges: 5 @ 1 Minute) make the recipient actually move faster, and thus farther?

[SteveZilla]

The problem here is that adders add to the power for END whether or not they are in use (I think).

That is how they are according to 5RE. I favor house rules that make them only cost their END when they are being used. Which was what several of us were discussing (sorry for the derail) lately.


What you could do is build the NCM with a big increase in END cost when it is in use to simulate the larger fuel use.

OTOH you are probably running it off a fuel charge anyway, so moving fast or jinking about all over the place will come to the same in the end: 4 hours flight time (or whatever)

Which is a potential "failing" of Fuel Charges -- they don't allow for the granularity of graduated usage. Using 1" of flying or 100" of flying for one Phase costs the same to a Fuel Charge.

Though in the same way you can apply Costs END to a Continuing Charge, you could apply Increased "END" Cost to a power that uses a Fuel Charge. So that a x2 Increased Fuel Usage would costs twice as much per Phase of use than normal. But it still doesn't allow for graduated usage.

[Dust Raven]

The analogy was not a direct 1 to 1.

The examples were not intended to be accurate models of actual aircraft. If that were the goal I would probably build a normal F-14's flight with the extra non-com portion as a 'naked adder' with an increased END limitation. The non-swept example would just have a higher multiple of increased END.
My point was that the END cost should be different. Under the standard rules, if the F-14 slows down to 20" combat, it still uses the same END as if it were flying at full speed non-combat.

[captainNeda]

I know this is an old thread, but this is something I’ve been considering for several years now was an alternate to speed. Throw in your input on it.

The basic premise is based on the +5 = 2X power concept where +5 STR Doubles lifting capacity and in theory Damage. I used the Kenetic Energy formula f= 1/2MV^2 where doubling mass doubles damage (+1DC), but doubling velocity quadruples damage (+2DC). Try it.

Any way using this premise doubling speed adds 2DC I built movement purchased per segment where 10 points doubles velocity. Base movement is 1”/segment and max human is 2” per segment.

The changes this has on the system primarily effect damage, turn mode, acceleration and Noncombat movement. Damage becomes easier and consistent in that movement damage is 2DC for every 5 Pts of movement. 60 pts of movement would be 32”/segment and +12DC. I’ll cover Acceleration, turn Mode and Noncombat movement later.

[captainNeda]

Acceleration
Acceleration is related to Non-combat movement and inversely related to turning. Basically acceleration is 2” / 1” traveled, and turn mode is one evenly spaced 60 degree turn per segment if the full combat movement is used. Every time half the combat movement is used, the character can double the number of EVENLY spaced turns. Every time a non combat multiplier is used, the number of segments to make a 60 degree turn in doubled. Why is that?

MATH CONTENT
Well assume that we chunk all acceleration in 1 second/segment blocks. Combat movement assumes all movement/displacement is performed in one segment. Displacement (the distance moved) is velocity over Time. Displacement during acceleration is the initial Velocity in this case 0 + the final velocity over 2 or (0+FV)/2. In other words an object going from 0 to 16” would move 8” (0+16)/2. Hence acceleration is 2” per inch.

[captainNeda]

Turn Mode
For turning, the circumference of a circle is 2piR. I won’t go into the math, but if the force it takes to accelerate was used for making turns, a character moving at full combat velocity would be able to move in a circle with a circumference roughly 6 (actually 6.28) times that of their movement. This means it would take 6 segments to run a 360 degree circle, or to make one turn every 60 degrees. The nice thing is if the character traveled slower, it doesn’t require as much force to change course, that is why they are able to change their turn mode.

In game terms a character moving at full combat speed can make 1 evenly spaced 60 degree turn per segment. If they cut their movement in half, they double the number of evenly spaced turns they could make. In other words if a character with 8” of movement moving 8” could make 1 turn every 8”, but if they decided to move only 4”, they could make 2 turns, 1 every 2”.

This turn mode works in reverse as well in that every doubling of movement in noncombat cuts the number of turns by half. A character with 16” of combat movement using the normal X2 Noncombat multiplier to travel 32” can make 1 turn every 2 segments, or every 64”.

This concept leaves Noncombat levels are unchanged, however they would change improved acceleration and turning levels. What I’d like to do is build a system where a character can double their acceleration and turn mode for 5 Character points. In other words they could go from the basic 2”/1” acceleration to 4”/1” and from on 60 degree turn to two. This adder would also have the added benefit of allowing the character to increase their movement by 50% of their last increase up to their full Natural noncombat value. In other words a character with 4” of combat movement purchasing this adder once gains 2” of movement, and purchasing it a second time would gain another 1”. This adder could be purchased until they had 8” of movement. If this adder is purchased however, they CAN NOT purchase a Non combat multiplier.

Basically doubling the acceleration would assume it takes less time to reach top speed. A character starting from a dead stop with 4” of movement would travel 2” before reaching their top speed, and still have a fraction of a second to move at 4” velocity, traveling an additional 2”. Every increase then would only naturally lend itself to improved movement until they character reaches maximum acceleration which is equal to their non-combat movement in one inch. IE a character with 4” has 8” natural Noncom, would be able to increase acceleration to 8”/1”.