Perception and Reaction as separated stats

[migo2154]

Hello everyone!.

I'm making a fantasy heroic-based campaign, and i want to make 2 extra characteristics: Reaction and Perception. These are my reasons:

- First: i want to make dexterity to cost 1 character point each, and determine de reaction speed of characters with a brand new stat: Reaction (REA) (1 character point each). This stats will be used to determine turn orders, and to make reaction rolls, wich determines who make actions first in roleplay situations, or determines how fast a character respond to surprise events.

- Second i want to make the Perception (PER) as a separate Characteristic, because i want to make perception-based characters (Werebeast, for example), that aren´t very intelligent, but more instinctive-sensory kind of characters. Another reason i have is that there are 2 magic systems: Mentalism (Int-based) and spiritism (Ego-based), and i'm feeling that Inteligence Char has become a high important characteristic, but i don't want to make it a 2 points Char, instead, i want to separate it into 2 stats: INT (Mental - Logic) and PER (Instinct - Sensory), and let the players to decide what kind of skills they want to pick without make them buy a 2cp stat when they only want some of their functions.

So, i would ask you 2 things:

1 - This really is a good solution to accomplish my balance and gameplay goals?.
2- What skills can i introduce in perception, if i go that way?, I'm thinking on lipreading, navigation and analyze, and i'm making some talents like danger sense to make PER rolls, but i don't know what else could do 

 

I'm using characteristic maxima (Characteristics above 20, skills rolls above 13 and ocv,dcv above 6 have their costs doubled, 30 active cost maxima for powers).

 

PD: My english is not so good (im spanish), so i hope i could explained myself well enough.  i'm sorry 

[Greywind]

You can buy up Perception without increasing INT already.

[Duke Bushido]

Does 6e let you sell down PER if you have a high INT?

 

(Asking because I really,dont remember)

[migo2154]

17 hours ago, Greywind said:

You can buy up Perception without increasing INT already.

As enhanced perception?, i read in the powers section that you can buy enhanced perception rolls to increase it without buy INT, and i can make it that way, but my problem is when a player want buy high INT, because they will have high perception skills, high INT skills rolls (in my campaign exists crafting skills, INT-based), and there exist int-based magic. So, any player that can have high INT, also can have high perception skills, high craft skills, int skills, and high magic rolls if they want, and i don't want to arbitrary prohibite my players to do what they want, so my idea was to balance the importance of INT CHAR Without making it a 2 point cost Char, instead, i was trying to split INT into 2 separate chars, and divide all skills between them.
 

 

13 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Does 6e let you sell down PER if you have a high INT?

 

(Asking because I really,dont remember)

Ahmm... idk hahaha...

I supose i can make it by buying with limitation?

[Scott Ruggels]

3 hours ago, migo2154 said:

 

As enhanced perception?, i read in the powers section that you can buy enhanced perception rolls to increase it without buy INT, and i can make it that way, but my problem is when a player want buy high INT, because they will have high perception skills, high INT skills rolls (in my campaign exists crafting skills, INT-based), and there exist int-based magic. So, any player that can have high INT, also can have high perception skills, high craft skills, int skills, and high magic rolls if they want, and i don't want to arbitrary prohibite my players to do what they want, so my idea was to balance the importance of INT CHAR Without making it a 2 point cost Char, instead, i was trying to split INT into 2 separate chars, 

 

So this would be a situation of a Nobel laureate researcher with a 27 INT score, but with just a normal human perception, (PER 10), versus the nervous Belgian Malinoise at his feet with an INT of 5-6, but a PER of 25, and can tell the difference between the neighbor kids stealing apples from his back yard, from the armed adults trying to get into the house to steal the research notes. I could see the separation of the two. 
 

As for the separation of DEX and REA, I do not.  Hero already does this if you want to be faster than your indicated DEX, with “ Lighting Reflexes”, often called “Quikfraw”, from its origins in Western Hero. Having less reaction time than your indicated DEX just means to drop your speed.  The old village watch maker may have a DEX of 20, but a SPD of 1, so people get frustrated walking beside him.  Hope this helps.  

[migo2154]

1 hour ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 

So this would be a situation of a Nobel laureate researcher with a 27 INT score, but with just a normal human perception, (PER 10), versus the nervous Belgian Malinoise at his feet with an INT of 5-6, but a PER of 25, and can tell the difference between the neighbor kids stealing apples from his back yard, from the armed adults trying to get into the house to steal the research notes. I could see the separation of the two. 
 

As for the separation of DEX and REA, I do not.  Hero already does this if you want to be faster than your indicated DEX, with “ Lighting Reflexes”, often called “Quikfraw”, from its origins in Western Hero. Having less reaction time than your indicated DEX just means to drop your speed.  The old village watch maker may have a DEX of 20, but a SPD of 1, so people get frustrated walking beside him.  Hope this helps.  

Oh, yes, this helps me a lot!. Thank you very much! 

[unclevlad]

Yep.  Lightning Reflexes does that separation for you quite nicely.  

 

For the INT, another option would be to buy Skill Levels with all INT skills.  That doesn't boost PER.  By RAW it's not quite the same, as doing this doesn't help with INT-based background skills (which is all knowledge and science skills).  Under the circumstances, tho, I'd waive that limitation.  Other options...negative levels with PER.  +1 with all sense groups is 3.  Note that I'd only allow this to a point.  

 

I don't think you need to touch INT, tho, for that...you can give the sharp-senses type the bonus to PER and be done with it.  Note that EGO is only 1 point, and it has a significant defensive role...it's the threshold basis for several fairly important mental powers.  

[Duke Bushido]

On 12/10/2021 at 12:16 PM, Scott Ruggels said:

As for the separation of DEX and REA, I do not.  Hero already does this if you want to be faster than your indicated DEX, with “ Lighting Reflexes”, often called “Quikfraw”, from its origins in Western Hero. Having less reaction time than your indicated DEX just means to drop your speed.  The old village watch maker may have a DEX of 20, but a SPD of 1, so people get frustrated walking beside him.  Hope this helps.  

 

 

What Scott said.  While SPD does mean "how many times you can act in 12 seconds," that serves as a fine indicator of your reaction speed.  Anything else you can tweak with Fast Draw or some custom talent build.

 

 

[Hugh Neilson]

OK, first off, I do not perceive a compelling NEED for change. I also believe the DEX, INT and PRE are comparable in providing multiple benefits, such that all three likely should be 2 point stats.  The only reason not to break them into 2 1 point stats is that the stat block is already huge, so if that is not an issue for your group, I'd say go for it.

 

INT does two major things - enhances INT skills and INT rolls, and provides better PER rolls.  We know that +1 enhanced PER costs 3 points and +1 with any one INT skill at a time costs 3 points.  6 points to get some of the impact of +5 INT?  That's why I feel INT should be 2 points - and for a -1 limitation, it can either be limited to PER or exclude PER. If you agree, the easy answer is to spin PER out of INT retaining 2 characteristics costing 1 point each.  Alternatively, make them cost 1/2 point each and the price of INT does not change.

 

[ASIDE:  Under my model, 5 points buys +5 INT with no impact on PER rolls.  That means +1 with all INT rolls, and +1 with all PER rolls, costs 5 points.  Limit from there for enhanced PER, and for more modest skill roll changes. 

+1 with only one roll based on that stat at a time should be reduced to 3 points.  +1 with only one roll (including +1 to a single skill) drops to 1 point.  You can have +1 to all rolls in a tight group for 4 points, and +1 to any one roll at a time in a tight group for 2 points.  +1 with only one roll based on INT (not a PER roll) at a time should be reduced to 3 points.  +1 with only one roll (including +1 to a single skill) drops to 1 point.  You can have +1 to all rolls in a tight group for 4 points, and +1 to any one roll at a time in a tight group for 2 points.

]

[migo2154]

On 12/11/2021 at 2:14 PM, unclevlad said:

Yep.  Lightning Reflexes does that separation for you quite nicely.  

 

For the INT, another option would be to buy Skill Levels with all INT skills.  That doesn't boost PER.  By RAW it's not quite the same, as doing this doesn't help with INT-based background skills (which is all knowledge and science skills).  Under the circumstances, tho, I'd waive that limitation.  Other options...negative levels with PER.  +1 with all sense groups is 3.  Note that I'd only allow this to a point.  

 

I don't think you need to touch INT, tho, for that...you can give the sharp-senses type the bonus to PER and be done with it.  Note that EGO is only 1 point, and it has a significant defensive role...it's the threshold basis for several fairly important mental powers.  

 

 

On 12/12/2021 at 10:13 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

OK, first off, I do not perceive a compelling NEED for change. I also believe the DEX, INT and PRE are comparable in providing multiple benefits, such that all three likely should be 2 point stats.  The only reason not to break them into 2 1 point stats is that the stat block is already huge, so if that is not an issue for your group, I'd say go for it.

 

INT does two major things - enhances INT skills and INT rolls, and provides better PER rolls.  We know that +1 enhanced PER costs 3 points and +1 with any one INT skill at a time costs 3 points.  6 points to get some of the impact of +5 INT?  That's why I feel INT should be 2 points - and for a -1 limitation, it can either be limited to PER or exclude PER. If you agree, the easy answer is to spin PER out of INT retaining 2 characteristics costing 1 point each.  Alternatively, make them cost 1/2 point each and the price of INT does not change.

 

[ASIDE:  Under my model, 5 points buys +5 INT with no impact on PER rolls.  That means +1 with all INT rolls, and +1 with all PER rolls, costs 5 points.  Limit from there for enhanced PER, and for more modest skill roll changes. 

+1 with only one roll based on that stat at a time should be reduced to 3 points.  +1 with only one roll (including +1 to a single skill) drops to 1 point.  You can have +1 to all rolls in a tight group for 4 points, and +1 to any one roll at a time in a tight group for 2 points.  +1 with only one roll based on INT (not a PER roll) at a time should be reduced to 3 points.  +1 with only one roll (including +1 to a single skill) drops to 1 point.  You can have +1 to all rolls in a tight group for 4 points, and +1 to any one roll at a time in a tight group for 2 points.

 

]

 

 

Mmm i get it... There is multiple ways that i could make it without the need of separate int.

But, it's really more easy for players to understand: Buy Int with a limitation of  "Only for Int rolls" or "Only for per rolls", rather than: you can buy PER, or INT?... I was thinking that it's more easy to understand the later, But i can understand what you're saying. So maybe it's better to simply play without that change, and see if it's really necessary.

 

The mayor problem i was thinking about is that i'm trying to make background skills for crafting and researching, because my campaign is heroic and survival-based, so a player could buy skills for make items(using materials), or repair them... And if that player could research, craft-repair items, use int skills, use per skills, and use magic, all with the very same CHAR, he could be very strong... But, maybe i should make research, craft, repair as non-CHAR based skills?, i mean, you get a 11-roll for 3 point cost, and the only way to raise that skill is buying +1 rolls for 2 points.


 

On 12/11/2021 at 9:03 PM, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

What Scott said.  While SPD does mean "how many times you can act in 12 seconds," that serves as a fine indicator of your reaction speed.  Anything else you can tweak with Fast Draw or some custom talent build.

 

 

Yes, you're right, it's better to simply don't touch DEX hehehe xD

[Hugh Neilson]

On 12/17/2021 at 8:24 PM, migo2154 said:

 

 

Mmm i get it... There is multiple ways that i could make it without the need of separate int.

But, it's really more easy for players to understand: Buy Int with a limitation of  "Only for Int rolls" or "Only for per rolls", rather than: you can buy PER, or INT?... I was thinking that it's more easy to understand the later, But i can understand what you're saying. So maybe it's better to simply play without that change, and see if it's really necessary.

 

I'd flip that around - while I don't see a compelling reason to change, I also see no compelling reason NOT to break INT down into the two component stats.  The only real question is pricing.  In my view, INT and PRE are underpriced as-is, so you could split them off as 1 point each.  Similarly, DEX could be split into a "DEX-based skills and rolls" stat (1 point) and an Initiative stat (1 points), PRE could be split into a "social skills stat" (1 point) and PRE attacks (1 point stat or 5 points for 1d6), and EGO could be split into EGO rolls (1/2 point stat) and PRE defense (1/2 point stat or +2 {PRE defense per point).

 

Keeping them linked works for a few reasons. 

 

First, if we expect most characters will include both elements if they are buying up the stat, why separate them?  For your game, you expect the opposite for INT - point for separation.

 

Second, breaking them down means an even bigger stat block. That's perception more than reality, but perception can matter.  [ASIDE: d20 does not have "only 6 stats" - it just breaks them down into subcomponents, where Hero puts them all up front. Imagine Hero with a stat block of STR, DEX, CON, INT, EGO, PRE; then blocks for "Health" including BOD, STUN, END, REC; Defenses for PD and ED; and a separate SPEED box (plus DEX-based Initiative if need be) and PER box (INT-based PER), a "Combat Resolution" box with OCV, DCV, mOCV and mDCV, and a "PRE attack and Defense" block.  I'm down to "only" 6 stats as well.  How many sub-stats does d20 have?]

 

Third, it's always been that way.  But your players are new to HERO, so it has not "always been that way" for them.  And if it's always been a way that's not as good for your game, then it's always been the wrong way.

[m.mavnn]

4 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

First, if we expect most characters will include both elements if they are buying up the stat, why separate them?  For your game, you expect the opposite for INT - point for separation.

 

This seems pretty much the central point of the whole discussion. RPGs have a limited 'definition' of how granular they can be defining stats before they become unplayable, which inevitably means grouping things together that are related but, well, not the same. 

 

But what's important detail in one genre is window dressing in another; I once saw a Star Trek game that had no physical stats, for example, because it didn't need that detail. It just had a very broad 'physically superior' advantage if you wanted to be Data or Worf. 

 

In your case, both perception and INT skills are absolutely crucial to the genre of the campaign, so I would say your intuition to split them up is a good call *for this game*. HERO is as much an RPG creation toolkit at the end of the day (see heroic vs superheroic options), so if you're going off the beaten genre path you may as well lean into that. 

[Hugh Neilson]

A bit off topic, but to m.mavnn's comment on Star Trek, I've commented in the past that Hero has multiple levels  of task resolution, and could have more options in that regard. We have the "opposed skill check" resolution for tasks expected to be fairly minor in-game and the "detailed and granular resolution" for the big  resolutions.  The latter is combat in Hero, but why does it need  to be in all games?

 

A more robust social conflict resolution would be more useful in a Court Intrigue game, or a Romance game. Mechanics for legal battles, or medical problems, could be more useful in some games (how many Star Trek episodes would be reduced to "make a xenobiology check" in a standard Hero game?

 

In many games where these tasks would benefit from a more granual resolution, physical violence might be reduced to making opposed Fisticuffs or Firearms skill rolls.

[Pattern Ghost]

Smart, low PER guy: Low INT, buys up INT-based skills or skill levels.

Smart, low INT Skill guy: Low INT, buys up PER rolls with one or more senses.

 

A High INT isn't required to represent an intelligent person. In hero, INT is more like mental agility, quick-wittedness in the moment, perception, etc., so you could easily have a 10 INT absent-minded professor type, with high skills who's brilliant, but doesn't think fast on his feet.

 

So, what you're trying to accomplish is already built into the system.

[migo2154]

 

 

On 12/19/2021 at 9:56 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

 

I'd flip that around - while I don't see a compelling reason to change, I also see no compelling reason NOT to break INT down into the two component stats.  The only real question is pricing.  In my view, INT and PRE are underpriced as-is, so you could split them off as 1 point each.  Similarly, DEX could be split into a "DEX-based skills and rolls" stat (1 point) and an Initiative stat (1 points), PRE could be split into a "social skills stat" (1 point) and PRE attacks (1 point stat or 5 points for 1d6), and EGO could be split into EGO rolls (1/2 point stat) and PRE defense (1/2 point stat or +2 {PRE defense per point).

 

Keeping them linked works for a few reasons. 

 

First, if we expect most characters will include both elements if they are buying up the stat, why separate them?  For your game, you expect the opposite for INT - point for separation.

 

Second, breaking them down means an even bigger stat block. That's perception more than reality, but perception can matter.  [ASIDE: d20 does not have "only 6 stats" - it just breaks them down into subcomponents, where Hero puts them all up front. Imagine Hero with a stat block of STR, DEX, CON, INT, EGO, PRE; then blocks for "Health" including BOD, STUN, END, REC; Defenses for PD and ED; and a separate SPEED box (plus DEX-based Initiative if need be) and PER box (INT-based PER), a "Combat Resolution" box with OCV, DCV, mOCV and mDCV, and a "PRE attack and Defense" block.  I'm down to "only" 6 stats as well.  How many sub-stats does d20 have?]

 

Third, it's always been that way.  But your players are new to HERO, so it has not "always been that way" for them.  And if it's always been a way that's not as good for your game, then it's always been the wrong way.

8 hours ago, Pattern Ghost said:

Smart, low PER guy: Low INT, buys up INT-based skills or skill levels.

Smart, low INT Skill guy: Low INT, buys up PER rolls with one or more senses.

 

A High INT isn't required to represent an intelligent person. In hero, INT is more like mental agility, quick-wittedness in the moment, perception, etc., so you could easily have a 10 INT absent-minded professor type, with high skills who's brilliant, but doesn't think fast on his feet.

 

So, what you're trying to accomplish is already built into the system.

Yeah, you're right, there already are ways to make that, but that's not what i'm trying to make... Look, i'll make a example for you:

This game is very survival oriented, players build their characters with 150 points (i'm thinking of low it to 120, but i'm afraid of being to low, i don't want to make it sooooo gritty), and 50 pc worth of limitations.

- Locational damage allowed.
- Locational defenses allowed (Only for Npcs and monsters).

There's a character maxima (-Characteristics: 20, -Ocv, Dcv, Omcv, Dmcv:  6, -Body: 20, and can't be higher that CON, -Stun: 40, and can't be higher than CONx2, -END: 50) and players cannot buy powers because they are only humans, unless they drops down their humanity by taking one of the following archetypes:

- Mutant
- Spiritist
- Psychic

All this archetypes requires a 15-points talent called "Supernatural talent" that allows them buy their powers, 30 points active-cost limit, and a mandatory 25-points worth of a combination of the following limitations:

Non-human: They're not considered as part of human society, so Npcs can decide to elevates the price of all things while they trades with them, or directly not trade with them, and some others directly hates them, and don't want to speak.
Distincts features: They have some types of supernatural features that people recognize as non human, some people considere this as a monstruosity.
Hunted: Some Npc, or Npc group could be hunting them, because they think that non-human must be erradicated, or simply because they are bad people finding excuses to do bad things without punishment.
Code of conduct: Some non-humans may have behaviours related with their archetype, example: Maybe a spiritist have a strong religious mentality, or because they have a spiritual way, they see life differently to rest of people, so they're very pacifists. 
Hates technology: Some types of non-humans (Naturalist Shamman, for example), hates human technology very much, because they considere it the reason of the apocalypse, or because they hate what it represents, so, they will not used it, or will use it with very limitations (Restricted use of explosives or firearms).

There are others restrictions, Thought:

Flying is not allowed, Absortion is not allowed, or is a VERY limited feature, Healing and Dispel are very, very..... VERY!! limited powers... You'll see, i build some types of diseases as DRAIN, and cannot be healed or dispeled by powers, but they can buy medicines, or CRAFT IT, if they have Medicine (INT-BASED Skill) and find materials (PER-based Rolls, only if they have the profession to recognize it as material), but spiritist can buy Healing powers for that.

Players must have skills like Survival (Find good places for camp, find food or water), Scavenging (Find materials of ancient sites - Yeah, this is a post-apocalyptic game :'3), navegation (to not get lost in wilderness, because nobody wants to get lost) and such... They're all PER-based skills. Players can also have skills like Weaponsmith, Medicine, Explosives, Weaponsmith, Research and such (INT-based Rolls, in order to make items that don't cost pc to use. 

And then, we have Paul:  A skilled human explorer with 20points of DEX (20 PC) and 25 points of INT (20 PC). With that, he have a base 14 with all survival, craft, recolection, perceptive and intelectual skills, only for 3 active points each, and a base 13 for all dexterity skills (Stealth, for example), and if he wants, he could also have psychic powers (INT based). He is arguably the most all-rounded and self-sufficent character of the group, he literally don't need nobody in order to survive...

Of course, i could prohibite him to do that, because i'm the GM, i can go and say: "Look, your character is amazing!, but i can't permit this, so you have to remove some skills of your sheet", but i don't want to do it, because i want players do this kind of things if they want, but not at that low cost. Thats because i though in 2 solutions:

1 - Rise INT cost to 2points, so Pauls will need to pay 40 Points to do the same things, instead of 20.
2 - Create 2 separated skills: INT and PER, and distribute all functions into that, so paul now needs to rise 2 SEPARATED CHARS in order to do all of that.

And then here we are xD... That's where i get stucked, because i didn't know if there are the only solutions i have... So i thank you much for all your ideas! ^ ^


 

[Hugh Neilson]

On 12/19/2021 at 9:32 PM, Pattern Ghost said:

Smart, low PER guy: Low INT, buys up INT-based skills or skill levels.

Smart, low INT Skill guy: Low INT, buys up PER rolls with one or more senses.

 

A High INT isn't required to represent an intelligent person. In hero, INT is more like mental agility, quick-wittedness in the moment, perception, etc., so you could easily have a 10 INT absent-minded professor type, with high skills who's brilliant, but doesn't think fast on his feet.

 

So, what you're trying to accomplish is already built into the system.

 

There is a difference between "you can do it" and "the game supports it".  I could have an 8 INT (-2) and +5 levels with INT skills (20 points), so for a net cost of 18 points, I get an 11- skill roll and 11- INT rolls, but I can add 5 to a single INT skill at a time to get a 16-.

 

Or I could buy a 28 INT, have a 15- PER roll, 15- INT roll and 15- to all INT skills (marginally poorer roll - but only if there is no complementary roll) for the same 18 points.

 

If you built the first character and another player built the second, how often would your character shine compared  to the other character?  The costs are not equitable.

[m.mavnn]

There's also a matter of signaling, of communication. House rules can be a way of telling the players what matters in this campaign, how its focus is different from the 'default'. 

 

If you turn, say, High Society into a skill with subcategories (like survival) per noble house, you're giving a clue. If you turn it into a full blown social combat system, you're setting the campaign focus before the first character is started. 

 

Could you build characters with limited skill levels and PRE? Yes, but it would be a lot more hassle and a lot harder to communicate that this is an area that is a) important to the campaign and b) it's expected that characters will have varying levels of ability across these things. 

[migo2154]

10 hours ago, m.mavnn said:

There's also a matter of signaling, of communication. House rules can be a way of telling the players what matters in this campaign, how its focus is different from the 'default'. 

 

If you turn, say, High Society into a skill with subcategories (like survival) per noble house, you're giving a clue. If you turn it into a full blown social combat system, you're setting the campaign focus before the first character is started. 

 

Could you build characters with limited skill levels and PRE? Yes, but it would be a lot more hassle and a lot harder to communicate that this is an area that is a) important to the campaign and b) it's expected that characters will have varying levels of ability across these things. 

Hmm, wait a moment... i'm not very sure if i get it, but... I belive that what you're trying to say is to split some of the skills into more granular options (For example: split survival into camping and find food) so players must buy more skills in order to get all benefits, and increase the build cost without the need of touch INT?.

This may helps, because what worries me is the final price of the build for a player that wants to have high INT, so if i could have a better solution than make strange things with INT, i'll be happy too! ^ ^.

I was thinking on make some talents to have a skill requirement. For example: instead of ban "absolute time sense", make it requires a skill level of 17 in navigation , but based on your suggestion, i could convert it into a skill subcategory of navigation (something like "Time sense" skill, idk, i'm not good naming things in english x.x) and every time a player wants to know the exact day time, and he's in the wilderness, he rolls "time sense" skill.

It's just a example, because idk if it's a good idea to make players roll for everytime they wants to know what time is it xD.

 

 

17 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

There is a difference between "you can do it" and "the game supports it".  I could have an 8 INT (-2) and +5 levels with INT skills (20 points), so for a net cost of 18 points, I get an 11- skill roll and 11- INT rolls, but I can add 5 to a single INT skill at a time to get a 16-.

 

Or I could buy a 28 INT, have a 15- PER roll, 15- INT roll and 15- to all INT skills (marginally poorer roll - but only if there is no complementary roll) for the same 18 points.

 

If you built the first character and another player built the second, how often would your character shine compared  to the other character?  The costs are not equitable.

Yes, and the problem is that a player could do it in any way he wants, unless i prohibite him to do it, but i prefer to find ways of balance that costs, instead of prohibite things (But if i can't find any solution for something, i'll have to ban it).

 

[m.mavnn]

11 minutes ago, migo2154 said:

Hmm, wait a moment... i'm not very sure if i get it, but... I belive that what you're trying to say is to split some of the skills into more granular options (For example: split survival into camping and find food) so players must buy more skills in order to get all benefits, and increase the build cost without the need of touch INT?.

 

I wasn't actually - although that might make sense to your campaign, and is a great idea!

 

It was a more general comment: some things are really important, but only in certain campaigns. One way of telling players that when they are creating their characters is to make those things "first class citizens" during character creation. What do I mean by that? That they are a named thing, with a named cost that is presented to you as an option when you're building the character. If you run the style of campaign you're planning with the default rules, people might apply lightning reflexes, limited INT, enhanced perception, etc to get exactly the character they want but it will be expensive points wise compared to just buying lots of INT and DEX (as @Hugh Neilson pointed out) and (maybe more importantly?) first time HERO players will never think of doing it. Especially if they are coming from a more "pick your options from this list" style rules system.

 

For an other variation of making things "first class": Fantasy Hero provides a large number of talents that you can just pick off a list. Nearly all of them are pretty simple power builds to do common fantasy related things, but by providing them in a list you immediately raise the chances of people using them.

 

On a more directly practical note, I also personally think that your intuition is correct that INT is under priced for the style of game you're planning, because it has been priced for its utility in a fairly generic "action-y" type campaign. HERO's heritage is primarily supers, special agents, robots, high fantasy... so the pricing of abilities will reflect that.

 

The rules explicitly call out the fact that you may need to adjust the skill lists for different campaigns (and I believe adding subcategories or sub-dividing skills is talked about in a side bar, but that's from memory). I think you may be correct that it would be worth doing that for stats as well.

[migo2154]

19 hours ago, m.mavnn said:

 

I wasn't actually - although that might make sense to your campaign, and is a great idea!

 

It was a more general comment: some things are really important, but only in certain campaigns. One way of telling players that when they are creating their characters is to make those things "first class citizens" during character creation. What do I mean by that? That they are a named thing, with a named cost that is presented to you as an option when you're building the character. If you run the style of campaign you're planning with the default rules, people might apply lightning reflexes, limited INT, enhanced perception, etc to get exactly the character they want but it will be expensive points wise compared to just buying lots of INT and DEX (as @Hugh Neilson pointed out) and (maybe more importantly?) first time HERO players will never think of doing it. Especially if they are coming from a more "pick your options from this list" style rules system.

 

For an other variation of making things "first class": Fantasy Hero provides a large number of talents that you can just pick off a list. Nearly all of them are pretty simple power builds to do common fantasy related things, but by providing them in a list you immediately raise the chances of people using them.

 

On a more directly practical note, I also personally think that your intuition is correct that INT is under priced for the style of game you're planning, because it has been priced for its utility in a fairly generic "action-y" type campaign. HERO's heritage is primarily supers, special agents, robots, high fantasy... so the pricing of abilities will reflect that.

 

The rules explicitly call out the fact that you may need to adjust the skill lists for different campaigns (and I believe adding subcategories or sub-dividing skills is talked about in a side bar, but that's from memory). I think you may be correct that it would be worth doing that for stats as well.

Oh, i get it... Yeah, my players are new in hero, we've played only one game before, a low super hero based in a futuristic city (like Future batman), so they never could think on do that haha (i couldn't either, btw xD). 

So yeah, that's a very good solution to me, thank you very much! :3

[dsatow]

#1 I have no issue with any of the solutions presented thus far and I think everything is well discussed.  I have nothing against creating two new stats or not creating two new stats.  The specific GM knows how much those stats will be applicable and used.  I am only suggesting an alternate solution.

 

#2 If the you want to reduce the stat's effect on perception (since by design you can't generally lower the perception below 9+ unless you allow negative stat effects), you could always use a physical limitation.  I would guess at least a -2 PER per 5 point limitation. To be honest, I would make it -2 @ 5pts, -5 @ 10pts, and -8 @ 15 pts.  Similarly, you could use buy it as a limitation on special senses too: -2 @ 1/4, -5 @ 1/2, and -8 @ -1.  Note different GMs would weigh these differently, but I would not go below -2 per 5 pts of physical disadvantage as it becomes less disadvantage and more of a cheap way to buy INT.

[migo2154]

On 1/3/2022 at 12:37 AM, dsatow said:

#1 I have no issue with any of the solutions presented thus far and I think everything is well discussed.  I have nothing against creating two new stats or not creating two new stats.  The specific GM knows how much those stats will be applicable and used.  I am only suggesting an alternate solution.

 

#2 If the you want to reduce the stat's effect on perception (since by design you can't generally lower the perception below 9+ unless you allow negative stat effects), you could always use a physical limitation.  I would guess at least a -2 PER per 5 point limitation. To be honest, I would make it -2 @ 5pts, -5 @ 10pts, and -8 @ 15 pts.  Similarly, you could use buy it as a limitation on special senses too: -2 @ 1/4, -5 @ 1/2, and -8 @ -1.  Note different GMs would weigh these differently, but I would not go below -2 per 5 pts of physical disadvantage as it becomes less disadvantage and more of a cheap way to buy INT.

Hmm, maybe this would be a mandatory physical complication like:

Physical complication: Human perception
-2 PER rolls (5 pts).

Normal humans must have this complication as part of their 50 pts limitations, but some players could buy the 10pts or 15pts version if they want.


Could be something like that?