Why does END in a reserve cost more than normal END?

[LoneWolf]

Why does purchasing END in a END Reserve cost more than purchasing normal END?  This does not make sense to me because one of the most common reasons for purchasing an END Reserve is to create a large battery that multiple powers draw off of.  A classic example would be a power suit that can operate for reasonable amount of time, but when it runs out of energy can no longer power the systems.  Often they only way to recharge the battery is by plugging it in.  This type of reserve is not practical anymore.   

 

The only way to make an END Reserve work without crippling the character is to buy up the recovery high enough to cover the characters END usage for the turn.   When you do that you are basically buying 0 END on the power in an alternate way.   Another way to do it would be to use fuel charges instead of an END Reserve, but that does not allow the powers to draw off a common reserve.  

 

Were END Reserves abused so much that they decided to nerf them?  Like anything END Reserves can be abused but this was never a big problems in the games I played in in 4th or 5th edition.  Prior to that there were some really bad exploits that were pretty bad. 
 

[Hugh Neilson]

I suspect this is because END reserves do not drop to zero when the  owner is knocked out.  The pricing sets it as a +1/4 advantage (like Persistent, which it is), increasing the cost from 0.2 CP per END to 0.25 CP.  One could also argue that the inability to burn STUN instead is limiting, I suppose.

 

Slow recovery, or recovery restricted to specific circumstances, is a limitation on REC, not on END.  How does the END itself lose utility by a lack of REC?  A character with 500 END and 2 REC will also get their END back very slowly.

 

One could argue that the implicit -1/2 limitation on the REC is too low, given that it does not stack with normal REC (although neither does the END) nor recover STUN or BOD.  But it does happen at PS 12 even when the character is in GM's Option territory or suffocating.

[Steve]

A notion I had after reading this thread might be to build a character with 0 END and buy it instead with an END Reserve, with all abilities powered by the reserve. In such a case, could you take a Limitation on your REC that it only affects STUN and BODY? That would mitigate a bit the cost of buying two REC abilities.

[Christopher R Taylor]

END reserve is useful in that it is a separate body, so if someone drains END, they won't drain it, or have to target it separately.  But that's true of regular END too: they have to target that separately and cannot get both if someone targets END Reserve.  Almost all of the conceivable advantages you get from END Reserve are in the recovery (it ignores your status, it recovers every time without needing to take a phase to recover, etc, etc.  I have for a long time through many editions of Hero thought END Reserve probably is over priced, especially the END portion -- compared to the price of END, at least.

 

In my opinion, END was way way WAY WAY WAY underpriced for this edition, like people said "we don't like or use END tracking anyway, let's just make it too cheap"

[unclevlad]

But one thing you can do, with a power armor style build, is buy up the REC in the END reserve something crazy.  This looks like it's very similar to buying 0 END...but there's a huge difference.  You're not impacting the active points on the expensive powers...your 10d6 blast goes into a 50 point (control cost) VPP, not 62 points for 1/2 END or 75 for 0 END.  You can apply that to other things, like your Flight.  

 

I think it takes some consideration, but I think you can use the fact that you *don't* have to buy Reduced END in a manner very similar to a Power skill.  Buying one doesn't save you much, if you're just buying it for a single power.  But if it's applied to multiple powers...the savings get to be considerable.  The END Reserve REC is the "power skill";  the cost savings comes from not increasing the active point cost with an advantage, rather than applying a limitation. 

 

I'll grant that this might dictate buying an arguably abusively high REC.... 

 

Another point may be that...well, if it's going onto power armor, it's OIF anyway, so there's a substantial cost break.  Figure:  9 REC in an OIF END Reserve only costs 4 points.

 

From a character design standpoint:  when you buy REC, are you buying to deal with END costs per turn, or for purposes of recovering STUN?  If your REC for STUN purposes would be about the same as for END...well, the END Reserve is gonna ba a hard sell.......

 

[Tom Cowan]

So, can you use the 5 points to get 2x END Reserve

Say buy a 40 END REC 1 END Reserve then spend 10 points to get 3 more?

[Hugh Neilson]

2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

END reserve is useful in that it is a separate body, so if someone drains END, they won't drain it, or have to target it separately.  But that's true of regular END too: they have to target that separately and cannot get both if someone targets END Reserve.  Almost all of the conceivable advantages you get from END Reserve are in the recovery (it ignores your status, it recovers every time without needing to take a phase to recover, etc, etc.  I have for a long time through many editions of Hero thought END Reserve probably is over priced, especially the END portion -- compared to the price of END, at least.

 

In my opinion, END was way way WAY WAY WAY underpriced for this edition, like people said "we don't like or use END tracking anyway, let's just make it too cheap"

 

6e is the first edition I have seen where people consider buying END and REC up rather than buying reduced END.  Similarly, purchasing STUN and REC rather than more defenses is viable in 6e. For similar reasons, I rarely saw people buy up STUN, END and/or REC rather than CON in 5e or prior.  If I'm going to buy another 20 END and +2 REC for 14 points just spend 20 on +10 CON, spend 2 less on ED and (if you don't want it) sell the STUN back - that only cost 13.

[LoneWolf]

In 5th edition 1 point got you 10 END and normal END cost 1 point for 2 END.  REC for the reserve was 1 point per recovery vs 2pt for normal recovery.  So, while the END has gotten more expensive the REC has actually gotten cheaper.  This changes the dynamics of using an END reserve to be the complete opposite of what it should be.    Now instead of being a way to have a power that can be used for a while and then needed to be recharged it has become a way to get a power costing 0 END without increasing the active cost of the power.  

 

The most efficient way to use an END reserve now is to calculate out the cost of the END you will use in a turn and buy both the reserve and the recovery at or slightly above that number.   Cost wise it works out to about the same cost of purchasing the power with 0 END, but does not increase the active cost and does not drop to 0 when you are knocked out. 

 

I am thinking of using an adjusted 5th edition pricing for END Reserves.  Probably 20 END for 1 point and REC being 1 for 1.   

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

6e is the first edition I have seen where people consider buying END and REC up rather than buying reduced END

 

I mean, putting aside the subjective nature of this analysis, the trick is to make both equally valid and attractive rather than promote one or the other.  In my opinion 6th goes way too far in the direction of encouraging by making Endurance essentially meaningless.  REC is so cheap and END is so much more cheap that its a trivial expenditure to make your character never have to worry about running out in any battle no matter how extended.  This negates one of the best and most interesting innovations Hero came up with, in my opinion.

[Hugh Neilson]

6 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

In 5th edition 1 point got you 10 END and normal END cost 1 point for 2 END.  REC for the reserve was 1 point per recovery vs 2pt for normal recovery.  So, while the END has gotten more expensive the REC has actually gotten cheaper.  This changes the dynamics of using an END reserve to be the complete opposite of what it should be.    Now instead of being a way to have a power that can be used for a while and then needed to be recharged it has become a way to get a power costing 0 END without increasing the active cost of the power.  

 

The most efficient way to use an END reserve now is to calculate out the cost of the END you will use in a turn and buy both the reserve and the recovery at or slightly above that number.   Cost wise it works out to about the same cost of purchasing the power with 0 END, but does not increase the active cost and does not drop to 0 when you are knocked out. 

 

I am thinking of using an adjusted 5th edition pricing for END Reserves.  Probably 20 END for 1 point and REC being 1 for 1.   

 

In 1e to 3e, it was a limitation.

 

60 AP power at 0 END would cost 90 points.  Assuming 5 SPD, a 32 point END reserve would cost 8, and 32 REC would cost 21 for a total of 29.  So yes, pretty close.  6 SPD, I need a 36 point reserve so 9 points and 36 REC so 24, for a total of 33.

 

With pretty much the same impact that you can use that 60 point power as much as you want, even if you just recovered from being KOd.

 

Same or similar effect having the same or similar cost seems reasonable to me.

 

So that same 6 SPD under your model spends 2 points for the END and 36 for REC, or 38 points. If he has 5 SPD, he only needs 30 REC so 32 total points.

 

Where is the huge difference?  I guess he can pay 12 points for 240 END (enough to fire it 40 times - that seems like plenty for combat) and 2 for REC (fully recovered in half an hour) and basically get 0 END for 14 points.  You consider that a more balanced result?

[LoneWolf]

What I am looking to create is a character that has a large battery that last a reasonable amount of time but can be exhausted.  Once he runs out of energy he needs to plug in the suit and let it recharge for a while.  With the way END Reserve are priced you end up paying more for something that can run out of energy than something that can function for an unlimited amount of time.    I can use fuel charges for individual powers but that means each system run independently. 

 

Think of a suit of power armor that can operate for hours out of combat, but when they get into combat starts using energy at a higher rate due to using the weapons and defensive systems.  I could purchase the powers at 0 END and try to fiddle around with a partially limited power. I could also probably do something like put the cost END on the recovery and purchase another END Reserve that powers the recovery.   But it seems a shame to have to jump through so many hoops to create something that is pretty common in fiction.   
 

[SCUBA Hero]

58 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

In 1e to 3e, it was a limitation.

 

60 AP power at 0 END would cost 90 points.

 

60 AP was 12 END (1 per 5).  So 12/6/3/1/0 was a +1 Advantage for 120 points, not 90.  Or am I missing something?

[LoneWolf]

When you can only recover the END in a limited circumstance, like only at your base it is a lot more limited.  Now when he runs out END most of his powers do not work at all, including his flight.  That means he has no way to easily get back to base and is a sitting duck until he can recharge. The character using personal END is only at a disadvantage in combat.  Once out of combat any character who is awake can take a couple of recoveries and be at full END in usually less than a minute. 

By your calculations you are spending 85 points on the END reserve.  But if you purchased a 72-point reserve (the base STR and move uses personal END) with a recovery of 72 it would cost you only 66 points.  This allows the character to always use his powers at full.   if we keep the Reserve and REC at 90 that works out to be 83 points, which is still slightly cheaper than what you spent.  By buying the reserve and REC to match the END usage is cheaper and more efficient than buying a reserve that can actually run of END 

 

The way END Reserves are structured there is no reason not to have it represent an ultra-efficient never ending power source.  When you have to pay more points for something that is clearly less advantageous there is something wrong. 
 

[Hugh Neilson]

I think I lost a Reply somehow.

 

@SCUBA Hero, my comment on prior editions was limited to pointing out this used to be a limitation.  But it only recovered once a day when it was a limitation, and as I recall the limit was "max END for full power multiplied by X", with X being half the charges you would get for the same limitation value (so x8 END battery was -0, and you could use it 8 times at full power, then done for the day).

[Hugh Neilson]

15 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

What I am looking to create is a character that has a large battery that last a reasonable amount of time but can be exhausted.  Once he runs out of energy he needs to plug in the suit and let it recharge for a while.  With the way END Reserve are priced you end up paying more for something that can run out of energy than something that can function for an unlimited amount of time.    I can use fuel charges for individual powers but that means each system run independently. 

 

Think of a suit of power armor that can operate for hours out of combat, but when they get into combat starts using energy at a higher rate due to using the weapons and defensive systems.  I could purchase the powers at 0 END and try to fiddle around with a partially limited power. I could also probably do something like put the cost END on the recovery and purchase another END Reserve that powers the recovery.   But it seems a shame to have to jump through so many hoops to create something that is pretty common in fiction.   
 

 

So let's look at EXACTLY how he is limited.  And let's get rid of the armor, which muddies the water.

 

Adrenaline Man has 10 STR, normal defenses and normal movement...normally.  But he can tap into his reserves for +50 STR (now spending 6 END per attack), +20 rPD and rED tensing up to resist attacks (also costs END, so 6 more END per phase) and add +48 meters running (so 3 more END per phase for a 30m half move).  He has a 5 SPD, so he burns 75 END per turn.  He buys a 300 point END reserve so he can go all out for 4 turns.  75 points.  And he buys 15 REC (more than enough to use 10 STR and 12m running all the time). 10 more points.  It takes 20 turns (4 minutes) to fully recover the battery.

 

Or he could buy +300 END (60 points) and +15 REC (75 points) for a pretty comparable result, but 10 points cheaper. 

 

Phase 12, he's smacked for enough STUN by surprise to take him to negative STUN.  PS12 he recovers with 1 STUN.  And 1 END.  10 extra points for the END reserve is looking pretty good!
 

He could, of course, have made everything 0 END for 30 + 20 + 30 points, which is 80 points in total.

 

Now, the higher his SPD, the worse the END reserve gets as he uses more END per turn.  It is simply a function of the fixed cost for 0 END. The reserve would be way better for a 4 SPD fellow. Maybe Reduced END should cost more if you have higher SPD?

 

4 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

When you can only recover the END in a limited circumstance, like only at your base it is a lot more limited.  Now when he runs out END most of his powers do not work at all, including his flight.  That means he has no way to easily get back to base and is a sitting duck until he can recharge. The character using personal END is only at a disadvantage in combat.  Once out of combat any character who is awake can take a couple of recoveries and be at full END in usually less than a minute. 

By your calculations you are spending 85 points on the END reserve.  But if you purchased a 72-point reserve (the base STR and move uses personal END) with a recovery of 72 it would cost you only 66 points.  This allows the character to always use his powers at full.   if we keep the Reserve and REC at 90 that works out to be 83 points, which is still slightly cheaper than what you spent.  By buying the reserve and REC to match the END usage is cheaper and more efficient than buying a reserve that can actually run of END 

 

The way END Reserves are structured there is no reason not to have it represent an ultra-efficient never ending power source.  When you have to pay more points for something that is clearly less advantageous there is something wrong. 
 

Emphasis added.  [How come you see my example but I don't?]

 

Anyway, the limitation is not on the END, but on your ability to recover it.  Hence, the price of the END is not changed and the price of the recovery is.

 

Once out of combat, will your example character typically be unable to reach a power source, or will "out of combat" mean he just returns to base and recharges?  If you were designing this character and the GM said "this will be a globetrotting game where you will be away from the base for weeks", I suspect you would change the recharge conditions rather than be useless for most of each scenario.

 

There is a character design aspect to this.  Buying a 15 DC attack, an 8 SPD, +20 rPD and rED that costs END and 60 meters of flight sounds great.  How well will it work if I leave my END and REC at 20 and 4 respectively?  Should I get a limitation somewhere for that?

[LoneWolf]

 Hugh you are missing my point completely.   With the END costing more than normal END, it is pointless to purchase an END Reserve unless you are buying up the recovery to cover the amount of END used each turn.  Doing so cost more than purchasing an END reserve that will actually run out.  

 

For some reason your example of Adrenaline Man showed up when I was posting.  I guess you must have been editing it when I posted.

Using your example of Adrenaline Man, I can purchase an END battery with 76 END and a recovery of 75 for 69 active points.  This will allow me to use all the characters powers and never run out of END.   Your example of an END Reserve with 300 END and a REC of 15 costs 85 points and is clearly less efficient than the 69-point Reserve.   The way END Reserve is currently structured it encourages players to create abusive characters.   

 

When they changed the cost of END to be more expensive than normal END and cut the cost of Recovery on the Reserve to less than normal Recovery it drastically altered how END Reserves work for the worse.   As it stands, I would not allow an END Reserve in a campaign I run because it is either going to be used in an abusive manner, or it is going to shortchange the player.    
 

What I am asking is for the input of the community to see what they think is a better way to do it.  Under the 5th edition rules a 300-point Reserve with a REC of 15 would cost 45 active points.  Does this seem fair or should the END cost even less because of the reduced cost of END?

[Hugh Neilson]

So 0 END on the powers I suggested as an example would cost 80 points.  Your construct would allow the character to use all of he powers at full END cost for just shy 5 turns, then rest for 4 minutes and be back to 100%, ready to go full-out for another 5 turns, for 45 points.

 

How often do you need to go full-out for 5 turns or more?  In my experience, not nearly often enough to justify cutting the cost from 80 points to go forever to 45 points because he needs a 5 minute break after going all-out for almost 4 turns.  That is the point which I think you are missing - the 5e pricing gives virtually all the benefits of 0 END at about half the cost.

 

[And i definitely lost a post - I had an earlier reply to Scuba and A-Man example, but I must have left without posting it.]

[LoneWolf]

5th edition makes it cheaper to buy the END in the reserve, but the REC is more expensive.  So, to purchase a reserve that allows you to use all you powers at full cost forever is more expensive under those rules.  To create an END reserve that would power all of Adrenaline Mans powers for an unlimited time would cost 83 points under 5th edition, compared to the 69 points under 6th edition.

 

What 5th edition does allow you to do is to create an END reserve that can allow you to operate at low power consumption for an extended period, but that is quickly used up when you get in to combat.  For example a suite of power armor that you can use your fight and maybe some enhanced senses for hours, but once you get into combat is quickly used up.  

 

The campaign I am designing will often require the characters to be away from their base for extended periods of time.  They will not always be able to pop back to base to top off. 

[Grailknight]

Will this END Reserve be required as a campaign setting?  If it is, then it'll become a points tax, if not I doubt it will be widely adopted.

 

If everyone has battery powered power armor then Drain END Reserve will  quickly replace Drain END. 

[LoneWolf]

No, it is not required.  I also require a power to be defined in non-game terms or it cannot be purchased. So, unless the player can come up with an appropriate special effect for the drain it will be vetoed. 

[Grailknight]

If it's not required, then I doubt these examples will ever come up outside of a power armor/mana well type character.

 

Give me the SFX of the End Reserve and I'm halfway there on the SFX of the Drain. Will that apply to your GM Villains and NPC"s equally?

[Hugh Neilson]

23 hours ago, LoneWolf said:

5th edition makes it cheaper to buy the END in the reserve, but the REC is more expensive.  So, to purchase a reserve that allows you to use all you powers at full cost forever is more expensive under those rules.  To create an END reserve that would power all of Adrenaline Mans powers for an unlimited time would cost 83 points under 5th edition, compared to the 69 points under 6th edition.

 

What 5th edition does allow you to do is to create an END reserve that can allow you to operate at low power consumption for an extended period, but that is quickly used up when you get in to combat.  For example a suite of power armor that you can use your fight and maybe some enhanced senses for hours, but once you get into combat is quickly used up.  

 

The campaign I am designing will often require the characters to be away from their base for extended periods of time.  They will not always be able to pop back to base to top off. 

 

In your example for 6e, the character bought a 72 END reserve (18 points) and 72 REC (48 points) for a total of 66 points.

 

Alternatively, he could buy +75 END (15 points) and +72 REC for 72 = 87.  Another 21 points, but that REC also recovers STUN. 

 

In 5e, he could buy an 80 reserve for 8 points and a 72 REC for 72 points = 80.

 

Buying +80 END (40) and +72 REC (144) = 184.  The END reserve was a much better deal in 5e.  Or we can approach this from the perspective that the REC should be cheaper, as -1/2 for "only recovers END" feels light, even if it is persistent.

 

The problem here is that you are placing very specific limitations and game assumptions, then asserting that the rules are wrong because your specific construct isn't very efficient.  END that isn't going to recover isn't going to be very efficient.  That's why we buy both END and REC.  Perhaps your construct would be better designed with Recoverable Charges of END that can only be recovered back at the base.  This might also be configured as "well, away from base he can figure out a way to at least restore power once a day so his charges will recover daily when stranded away from base".  That seems much more consistent with the source material than repeated arcs where Iron Man's armor is a clunky metal suit because he needs to get back home to recharge it.

[Hugh Neilson]

While we are discussing whether it is the END which is "limited" by the difficulty in recovering it, or the REC alone which is limited by the restricted access to the REC, ultimately it is the powers themselves which are limited by their need to access END.

 

If my character has 300 END, then needing 6 per attack (or even 12 per attack) is a lot less limiting in-game than it would be if he only had 20 END.