Jump to content

... armor, limits of limitations,etc.


Crypt

Recommended Posts

not really.

 

the CHARACTERS can't determine Active Points because that's not an In Game Thing.

 

Players, sure. But if part of the fun is letting players tweak and alter things, then it hardly matters.

 

Still - the problem is not the system.

 

 

the magician has this spell =>

 

Stone Skin

Armor 6 PD/6ED

Base: 18

Hardened (+1/4)

Active: 22

Cost Endurance (-1/2)

Gestures (-1/4)

Incantations (-1/4)

Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2)

Increased End Cost (X3, -1)

Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate

Real : 6 (still 6 without the Extra Time)

 

(Note: Underlined limitations are mandatory and cannot be removed. I have added an Extra Time (half phase at least) on all non attack spells because the campaign tends to be a crossworlds one, thus technos, psionics, mutants, etc..... may be encountered and i want the cost of powers to be fair.)

 

- An important law i've said to the players: "you will be able to improve your spells as far as their nature stays the same."

 

- Another thing= they did not create their characters, i've converted them from their old HARP's ones. So, for instance, in this example the player could have put every armor points in PD instead of spreading them.

 

- The maximum K damages the warrior of the group may do is 2.5D. (Imagine if i'd let the player build a 12PD/0ED Stone Skin spell...)

 

 

 

Now let's modify it =>

 

Stone Skin

Armor 6 PD/6ED

Base: 18

Hardened (+1/4)

Usable Simultaneously (X4, +3/4)

Active: 36

Cost Endurance (-1/2)

Gestures (-1/4)

Incantations (-1/4)

Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2)

Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate

Real : 13 (or 14 without the Extra Time)

 

 

- The characters earn 1 CP per session on the average.

 

 

 

Two problems =>

 

1. IMHO in campaign where powers tend to have several limitations (for instance FH) the way costs are computed often lead to situtations where removing one limitation does not change the real cost. That's a problem because it means that cost rules eventually mean nothing.

(Multiplying costs and CP by 10 would solve the problem. This is the same as not rounding the first digit.)

 

2. In a campaign where liberty of improvement is a ground rule defenses powers like Armor can easily and quickly ruin everything because of their low cost. The magician's player could improve his Stone Skin spell to the very boring second version in only an average of 7 sessions. (or 8 if we ignore the Extra time)

 

Now we may say that players are not supposed to tweak their spells.

That's not fun.

I have buckets of games where everything is limited in this way. I'd like Hero to be different.

(note: as far as i remembered we did not have such troubles in MEGS...)

 

Of course i could say that the X3 END cost is mandatory, or say that Usable Simultaneoulsy changes the nature of the spell so it would be a different one.... of course........ But it would be even nicer if the "bullet proof-592 pages-almost 100% rules-bible" actually helps the GM not "cheating" so often. I do not speak about babysitting gamers. I only speak about rules.

 

 

PS: the title of the thread could have been "No, you can't "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I'm not sure what the problem is.

 

First - the ability to adjust the PD/ED spread isn't RAW, it's either a House Rule or a Custome Advantage. We'll ignore that statment.

 

The only counterpoint - just because you can doesn't mean you should.

 

What's the in game explanation for spending those 7 Character points to remove the Limitation and add an Advantage?

 

"Because I had 7 XP" is not an explanation. That's as metagamey as the Character whipping out a parchment and saying, "Well I've been on this trail for eight days, it has taken four encounters, and I've been exceptionally chatty, I should have enough points to alter my spells now..."

 

The Rules need context. They need a Game, and the Game provides structure. The structure dictates how the points are spent, when and where. It also determines what is a good level for each element.

 

In one game 6PD might be so low as to be useless. In another, it might be average.

 

In fact I'm in a Monster Hunter Campaign where most of the Characters defenses are 6. I'm also in a Superheroic campaign where the average Resistant Defense is 15. Damage levels are comparable so that those Defensive Levels block the brunt of most attacks nicely.

 

So... what's the actual arguement that defensive costs are too low? That the number of XP you give out let's a character alter and buy a new version in too few sessions? That's not a rules issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Wouldn't the spell be better built with force field? Of course that would mean you could not take 'Costs END' but that applies to an AWFUL lot of powers...

 

I know - not the question :)

 

Point 1: Real cost may not change much if at all with fewer limitations if there are a lot of limitations already. Fair comment. Only solvable by having higher base cost spells or fewer limitations overall. I don't think this is a very common problem. A 10 point power has the same real cost if there are -2.75 to -2 in limitations, but the more active points the more you tend toward some variation in real cost. I'm not a massive fan of huge lists of limitations anyway.

 

Point 2: The ability to build game wrecking powers is why the GM is given a small Italian car. You are not stifling player creativity, you are stifling power lust, and that is fine (it says so in the bible).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

re: Force Field

using it instead of Armor just reduces the active and real costs (even without the Costs END Limitation).

 

The example given does point out an issue, but as Ghost Angel illustrated it's not with the rules. I think the real issue is with modeling fantasy magic.

 

And I think it is probably the single hardest thing to do well in HERO.

 

Just using regular END to power spells just doesn't feel right in most cases (even when using the Increased END Limitation).

 

One possible solution would be to enforce a mandatory 'Mana' Endurance Reserve requirement for magic users. Instead of restricting the spells that draw upon the reserve you just restrict modifications to the reserve itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

There are various options for costing fantasy magic in FH. One is to take the real cost and divide by a number (3? 5?)

 

Here's a thought: why not simply build spells without the mandatory limitations? That way you don't have scads of limitations and small variations can be felt.

 

THEN, once the spell is built (sans mandatory lims) apply a discount (a divider between 2 and 10 - same for all spells, certainly all spells of a certain type) to reflect the fact it is a spell. Mandatory lims apply effect but are not costed.

 

SO:

 

Mandatory Limitations (ignore in building spell)

Cost Endurance (-1/2)

Gestures (-1/4)

Incantations (-1/4)

Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2)

Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate

 

Stone Skin

Armor 6 PD/6ED

Base: 18

Hardened (+1/4)

Active: 22

Increased End Cost (X3, -1)

Real : 11 THEN divide by 3: 4 points

 

Stone Skin

Armor 6 PD/6ED

Base: 18

Hardened (+1/4)

Usable Simultaneously (X4, +3/4)

Active: 36

 

Real : 36 THEN divide by 3: 12 points

 

It is still only an 8 point difference but point 1 is no longer an issue. It is up to the GM to OK the more powerful build - or not.

 

The big advantage of this to my mind is that it looks so much neater: you'll rapidly get to know the mandatory lims, so the spell descriptions just show how the spell varies from that.

 

You could even relate the divider to the value of the mandatory limitations:

 

Another cool idea might be to have different dividers for different types of magic within a schools:

 

Stone School has a divider of 4 for defensive spells and a divider of 2 for offensive spells, whereas Fire School has 2 for defensive and 4 for offensive, and Water school is 3/3. That encourages Stone School mages to take many more defensive spells but does not proscribe them taking offensive spells...I'm off topic again, aren't I?

 

Back on topic, you posit removing 'Extra Time' and still having the same real cost - but extra time is a mandatory lim...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I keep reading the OP, and there's an itch in the back of my brain...

 

And I figured it out.

 

Limitations are not Points Constructs. They are Roleplaying Tool to simulate an ability appropriately.

 

What is the point of using a huge, 100% points based and relatively complex system where building characters can take hours if the system can't prevent unbalancing situations by himself, even in very classic cases ?

 

If the only reply is that the GM must put limits all the time so we could use any other game and do the same in 90% less time.

 

 

 

Back on topic, you posit removing 'Extra Time' and still having the same real cost - but extra time is a mandatory lim...

 

Can't Hero be played in crossworlds campaigns ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

What is the point of using a huge' date=' 100% points based and relatively complex system where building characters can take hours if the system can't prevent unbalancing situations [u']by himself[/u], even in very classic cases ?

 

If the only reply is that the GM must put limits all the time so we could use any other game and do the same in 90% less time.

 

That way lies only madness, mate :) Point value is never a completely accurate balancing system, so much so that, whilst I still construct using points, I usually ignore point totals when I am running the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

What is the point of using a huge' date=' 100% points based and relatively complex system where building characters can take hours if the system can't prevent unbalancing situations [u']by himself[/u], even in very classic cases ?

 

If the only reply is that the GM must put limits all the time so we could use any other game and do the same in 90% less time.

 

The System Is Not Your Babysitter.

 

It does not assume what your Game is.

It does not assume what your Genre Convetions are.

It does not assume what level you are playing at.

 

The System Is Not Your Babysitter.

 

Game Balance Is - Has Always Been - And Will Always Be - Up To The GM.

 

There is no way around that. It is not a flaw.

 

 

Stop trying to make the points do the work. You will fail.

 

and WTF is a "classic case" anyways... based on whose assumption of "classic"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I always used a VPP for fantasy magic, which A) put an upper limit on active points based on points spent; and B) allowed for them to add, remove, or change spells in a defined fashion - via the rules of the VPP.

 

The spell you mention does not at all seem "broken" - it's 6/6 Armor, then 6/6 Armor for the entire party. Even 12/0 armor is not broken - HERO has a dozen different ways to crack a brick.

 

Always set limits - maximum active points, maximum PD/ED/Resistant Defenses, etc. Keep in mind that a 60 Point attack will generally do some damage to a 60 point defense (12d6 EB is 36 STUN, 12 BODY more or less, vs. 20/20 armor you are still doing some stun.) In a deadlier campaign, you can set defense limits lower than attacks. But those limits are only part of the solution - you have to kind of learn how to spot balance problems and address them creatively. The best advice I can give for that is: Learn your player's habits and punish them for them - if your player(s) seem to have found an "invulnerability power" then show them what happens when an NPC has a better version of it, or exploit something they didn't think about, etc. Drain END is NASTY against that well-armored wizard.

 

I think a Multipower or VPP for your magic would be the best "quick fix" but really what you need to do is determine a good plan of attack for players improving powers and such. Which could be as simple as the players needing a few days or weeks of study, training, or whatever in order to spend XP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Removing the Limitations doesn't seem like a good idea, too Championesque, IMO -- Spells should pile on the Limitations, limitations = flavour.

 

The problem of having every point count I think, as a house rule, your suggestion of x10 costs and x10 character points solves the granularity problem for points (heck, if you needed to you could go x100 and it would work well for anyone who isn't scared of big numbers, the math is just as easy, easier because less rounding problems too).

 

In fact, if you change the points to a higher multiple it's easier to tweak the point costs of things as you get the extra detail in other areas.

 

It certainly can seem odd that a point build system like HERO has increments/decrements of abilities where the points don't change. I think that the trick is to use the HERO toolkit to make it your own game. Since the lack of cost changes with the Limitations and character advancement is a problem, then your cost multiplier solution might be just what you need for your game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

What is the point of using a huge' date=' 100% points based and relatively complex system where building characters can take hours if the system can't prevent unbalancing situations [u']by himself[/u], even in very classic cases ?

 

If the only reply is that the GM must put limits all the time so we could use any other game and do the same in 90% less time.

 

Can't Hero be played in crossworlds campaigns ?

 

You have to remember that HERO is a Gaming Toolkit more than a specific system.

 

RIFTS was a horribly, horribly unbalanced game - no thought was given to how characters from one area could match up to characters from another. D20 ends up being "don't roll a 1" for everything by 20th level or so. Both of those systems can be balanced by a good GM.

 

In HERO, the basic math of Power A vs. Power B is "balanced" - 5 points here and 5 points there should be more or less equivalent.

 

But you still have to run the game, keep the players from over-using potentially gamebreaking powers or advantages, stuff like that (no megascale fireballs in fantasy, please.)

 

HERO is simply - to me - easier to balance than it is balanced - because I can use the point values as a guide. But I still have to look beyond the points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Removing the Limitations doesn't seem like a good idea, too Championesque, IMO -- Spells should pile on the Limitations, limitations = flavour.

 

The problem of having every point count I think, as a house rule, your suggestion of x10 costs and x10 character points solves the granularity problem for points (heck, if you needed to you could go x100 and it would work well for anyone who isn't scared of big numbers, the math is just as easy, easier because less rounding problems too).

 

In fact, if you change the points to a higher multiple it's easier to tweak the point costs of things as you get the extra detail in other areas.

 

It certainly can seem odd that a point build system like HERO has increments/decrements of abilities where the points don't change. I think that the trick is to use the HERO toolkit to make it your own game. Since the lack of cost changes with the Limitations and character advancement is a problem, then your cost multiplier solution might be just what you need for your game.

 

I think the reason behind this is that at some point, more limitations doesn't really limit the power. I mean, if you have Gestures, Incantations, Focus, and Extra Time on your spells... sure that gives multiple ways to stop spellcasting - if you held an action to do so. Beyond that, the extra time kind of accounts for the other three.

 

Having "diminishing returns" on limitations keeps players from buying every power in the book at max level with limitations that bring them all down to a few points apiece.

 

In short, I think the way HERO stacks limitations (and advantages, for that matter) works quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I guess I look at Limitations as a way to build in flavour and differentiation into spells and characters not just as a way to shave off points.

 

As you pointed out above VPPs are good for Fantasy. I think one of the best features of a VPP is it puts a AP cap for controlling power levels and encourages Limitations with the Real Point limit which encourages a variety of spells.

 

I like a larger variety of spells with different Limitations for different situations instead of a smaller stable of flavourless generic spells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

The System Is Not Your Babysitter.

 

Offending and too easy.

 

 

Stop trying to make the points do the work. You will fail.

 

592 pages of point based rules....LOL

 

and WTF is a "classic case" anyways... based on whose assumption of "classic"?

 

a magician casting an armor spell isn't classic ? Come on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I think the reason behind this is that at some point, more limitations doesn't really limit the power. I mean, if you have Gestures, Incantations, Focus, and Extra Time on your spells... sure that gives multiple ways to stop spellcasting - if you held an action to do so. Beyond that, the extra time kind of accounts for the other three.

 

Having "diminishing returns" on limitations keeps players from buying every power in the book at max level with limitations that bring them all down to a few points apiece.

 

In short, I think the way HERO stacks limitations (and advantages, for that matter) works quite well.

 

 

Yes but the limit of limitations appears too quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I designed and played a Magic System where Players paid no points for Spells, had no limit on the number of spells used, and only bought Skills to use them. Heck, they didn't even need a specific skill for each Spell, just a general one. They could even adjust Limitations and Advantages on the fly.

 

Worked beautifully.

 

I've been saying "The System Is Not You Babysitter" for years.

 

It's not the easy answer. Actually, it's the hard answer, it forces the GM to look at the Game they're running, and make decisions on how they want it to feel, play out, and generally act - both Mechanically and In Game.

 

Sorry you feel that way, but you have yet to actually express a Rules Problem. Only a Game Implementation Problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Yes but the limit of limitations appears too quickly.

 

In your opinion.

 

I find it works just fine for games I've run. But then, I don't add Modifiers to look at point gain/loss.

 

Removing a Limitation and not changing the cost doesn't affect play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

In your opinion.

 

I find it works just fine for games I've run. But then, I don't add Modifiers to look at point/gain loss.

 

Removing a Limitation and not changing the cost doesn't affect play.

 

 

You seems to be a lucky man with very very nice players

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Sorry you feel that way' date=' but you have yet to actually express a Rules Problem. Only a Game Implementation Problem.[/quote']

 

The problems are that defenses powers are too cheap (i know you disagree) and limitations stop working beyond a point.

 

About the limit of limitations, i would not be surprised to hear that's one of the reasons Greg Porter uses adders instead of multipliers in EABA.

 

Removing a Limitation and not changing the cost doesn't affect play.

 

so i could as well use the Chaosium's Basic System...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

You seems to be a lucky man with very very nice players

 

I wouldn't play with a group I didn't get along with; I wouldn't GM for a group that didn't accept I was GOD for the next few hours of their lives :D

 

That's hyperbole, but the intent is sound: Rules are open for discussion and I'll entertain a player's interpretation of a situation, but ultimately, the GM's rule is law. A good GM will listen to his players up to a certain point, and at that point good players should stand down and accept the ruling so as to keep the game moving along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...