Do you limit Combat Skill Level's?

[Thia Halmades]

On 10/2/2020 at 10:05 AM, Gandalf970 said:

I am relatively new to Hero.  I have been running many RPG's for 40+ years and recognize min/maxers and power creeps.  My players are masters as I am sure yours are as well.  My question for Fantasy Hero is do you limit CSL's?  My players have figured out that if they buy 3 pt CSL's and not OCV/DCV straight up they save points.  I don't want to punish them, but they are running around with 12 levels of these.  Any thoughts or experiences would be helpful.

 

 

I’ve said it, I’ll say it again, “always set limits.” You can also set your ceiling/basement for a given skill or effect. For me, Persona was the first time I did this so specifically and aggressively, including capping added Damage Levels. It created a give/take mechanic, because they could certainly buy everything up to the max with base levels, but they lose flexibility. They can commit them all to flex levels, but that consumes a mess of points, so they ended up having this sort of default where they capped themselves at 6 OCV/6 DCV and used the rest. The exception to the rule were any modifiers of buffs, equipped Persona, etc. — this was purely (and intentionally) the purchased skill level cap.

[Steve]

I’ve been thinking about “soft caps” in another way, that caps could be set like skill maxima, requiring double cost for each step beyond.

 

So like a skills maxima could be set at 13- and then it takes two skills levels for each +1 past that, CV could be set at a number (7, for example) and then to reach 8 would require two levels instead of just one. A character that specializes in something would simply have more levels in their area of speciality that can be thrown into increasing CV or damage.

[eepjr24]

9 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Who taught Albert Einstein how to discover the Theory of Relativity?  Who trained Stephen Hawking to get better at physics?  What was the formal musical training which enabled the Beatles to advance music so significantly in under a decade?  I suggest that, in many fields, the top-tier people have long since moved past "being taught",and learn by doing, often by working in collaboration.

Einstein had been teaching for almost 10 years when he completed his General Theory of Relativity. And as I pointed out in my post, I said everyone can teach themselves it just takes more time than is typically available for normal game advancement. Hawking taught and collaborated for the last 30 years of his life. Collaboration is just another form of teaching, receiving outside input to hone your own skills. The Beatles are not my forte, you'll have to draw your own conclusions on that one.

 

I think we agree that people can self teach to nearly any level, although having teachers and collaborators is another option. I just don't think that most players want to spend 10 years becoming the best in their field.

 

- E

[Thia Halmades]

...why, what else are they doing with their time? That’s called “going to work,” and for most people, 10 years is when they started to get to the point of consistent recognition. They may not want to put in that time, but there are very few prodigies, and even they hit a limit where they need someone to provide new information.

[Hugh Neilson]

The other question of time is how much of those 10 years passed as the characters learned their craft, as part of their character background.  We don't start our Warrior fresh-faced and 12 years old, lifting a sword for the very first time, nor is our typical Wizard entering his first year of Magic 101 at Hogwarts. 

 

Having started with some learning and experience already under their belts, are we gaming out every day of their lives, or do they have down time when they hone their craft, collaborate with peers, with proteges and with greater experts than themselves, until reaching the point where they are the pinnacle of their field and there are no greater experts?  Do we stat out every teacher, trainer, student and collaborator they meet, and failing an in-game, played out meeting, our PCs live in a vacuum, speaking only with the other PCs and any cohorts along for the ride?  Or do they have down time activities that, while important to their development, and building relationships they value and prize, are simply not exciting enough to take up valuable game/screen time?