Which is Better, Figured Characteristics or No Figured Characteristics?

[Gauntlet]

So, I am checking to see what people think about the change from 5th Edition to 6th Edition. Do you prefer having figured characteristics that will increase based on the primary characteristics, or do you prefer all characteristics to be purchased separately.

[Christopher R Taylor]

I am of two minds on this.

 

I like figured characteristics, a lot.  I really love the feel of it, and it seems to make sense: the better your health, the more stun you have, etc.  It was one of the things that attracted me to Hero to begin with.  If I were to design a game, I would have figured characteristics.

 

However, in terms of game mechanics, balance, and build, having no figured characteristics works better.  Its more balanced in terms of cost and it makes stat-based characters balance better against skill/power-based characters, for example.  It makes the cost of various stats make more sense (STR, DEX, and especially CON was way too efficient).  But... it feels too plain and mechanical to me now.

 

Edit: so I guess its a push: I would have been happy either way, although my heart leans toward figured.  I know there are some who are more number crunchy that were deeply offended by the math though.

Edited July 31, 2023 by Christopher R Taylor

[Barton]

No figured IMHO.

[Doc Democracy]

I am an extremist as far as such stuff goes.  I think getting rid of figured characteristics is like getting rid of hereditary peers, a good first step.

 

😁

[LoneWolf]

I think that not using figured stats are better.  Figured stats lead to cookie cutter characters where the majority of characters have similar stats.   With figured stats buying up your primary stats is the most cost-effective way to build a character, this leads to less variation in all stats.   With figured stats almost all characters are going to boost up DEX and CON.   CON actually gives you more in figured stats than the cost of the CON.  Under 5th edition rules the only way to increase your base CV is to buy up your DEX.   You can use skill levels to boost the ending CV but there are times when you cannot use skill levels.   DEX is also more efficient at increasing your CV than skill levels.  For 26 points I can get a 23 DEX which gives me an 8 OCV and DCV.   That works out to 5.2 point per point of both OCV and DCV.  Add in DEX also giving you SPD and it becomes too good to pass up.  Even STR gets you more figured stats than it costs.   Most experienced players ended up boosting the primary stats more than they needed to be.

 

Not having figured stats leads to characters purchasing stats that are actually more in line with their concepts instead of boosting stats to get what they want for less.  Almost every Fantasy Hero game that lasted ended up with all the characters having maxed out DEX.   The supposedly heavy fighter having the reflexes of an Olympic gymnast seems to be a little farfetched. 

 

By not having figured stats it seems to lead to more nuanced and interesting characters.  Now if I have a character that is supposed to be incredibly hard to hit but is not equally accurate, I can buy up my DCV higher than my OCV.  Or I can have a character that is good with almost any weapon but does not fight like Spiderman.  
 

[Hugh Neilson]

2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I am of two minds on this.

 

I like figured characteristics, a lot.  I really love the feel of it, and it seems to make sense: the better your health, the more stun you have, etc.  It was one of the things that attracted me to Hero to begin with.  If I was to design a game, I would have figured characteristics.

 

However, in terms of game mechanics, balance, and build, having no figured characteristics works better.  Its more balanced in terms of cost and it makes stat-based characters balance better against skill/power-based characters, for example.  It makes the cost of various stats make more sense (STR, DEX, and especially CON was way too efficient).  But... it feels too plain and mechanical to me now.

 

Edit: so I guess its a push: I would have been happy either way, although my heart leans toward figured.  I know there are some who are more number crunchy that were deeply offended by the math though.

 

I like this balanced analysis.

At one point in the SETAC discussions, I think Steve noted he could have repriced the Primaries, and “No Figured” limitations to keep the relation with Figureds, but why bother once we had fair pricing for Figured?  If we want Figured back, it's not that hard to house rule it back in, but both the stats and No Figured need to be priced properly, and any sellback on characteristics with limitations also becomes challenging, as do limitations.

I'd like to see the pricing of DEX, INT and PRE reassessed, probably 2 points each with 5 points being +1 DEX/INT/PRE rolls and the remainder lightning reflexes/+1 PER/+1d6 PRE attack.  PRE defense would move entirely to EGO and be half of its 1 point cost, the remainder being resistance to mental effects and EGO rolls.

I keep toying with pricing "floating DCs" as well to rationalize things like MA DCs, Hand Attack and Deadly Blow et. al. Limited STR?  Limited Skill Levels? Not sure which makes the better model.

[Gauntlet]

I will say that no figured characteristics does make it easier for new players. But then again, I am so used to having them they are very hard to get rid of.

[Doc Democracy]

Hugh, you never considered no characteristics at all?  To me, a lot of the tensions in the system are to accommodate characteristics, even in you analysis there.

 

Doc

[unclevlad]

8 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

Hugh, you never considered no characteristics at all?  To me, a lot of the tensions in the system are to accommodate characteristics, even in you analysis there.

 

Doc

 

Not trying to be flippant, but...what do you mean?  MOST of the game uses characteristics in some form or another, so I really have no clue what you envision.

 

On figured vs. not...as noted, figured characteristics, principally STR and DEX, gave much too much in 5E.  In addition to the core aspects, 10 STR gave +2 PD, +2 REC, and +5 STUN.  In 5E, that's another 11 points.  DEX...seriously ugly.  3 DEX gives 3 points for SPD, and the big one...+1 OCV and +1 DCV.  That's 13 points.  Yeah, OK, DEX cost 3 in 5E, but still, it's 2 now.  The killer here is the boost to OCV and DCV.  Having the DEX cost 3 covers the SPD perfectly...but the OCV and DCV together are even more points overall, in many cases.  Note that by the rounding rules...going to an 11 DEX takes you to a 4 OCV and DCV.  1 point over the 6E cost for another 10 points of crucial benefits.  It's something that can easily get overlooked, since it's typically obscured.

 

Beyond OCV and DCV...STR is complicated.  It's 1 point in 5E and 6E...even if we use 6E costs for REC and STUN, it's 6.5.  (The 5E costs to increase the figured characteristics are high.)  That...might be livable.  Or, drop the STUN boost, so +5 STR just gives +1 PD and +1 REC.  Yeah, it's a little something for nothing but it's not bad.  The alternative...increase the cost of STR...is a MESS.  It increases the END issues for many character types.  It clashes with TK, HA, HKA, the martial talents, and martial maneuvers.  I think in terms of supers, but it has an impact in fantasy, where weapons have STR mins.

 

Recosting...for no figured stats, I think Hugh's suggestions largely work.  It definitely works for DEX, IMO;  an alternate approach would split DEX into AGILITY (for skill rolls) and QUICKNESS (for initiative), where each are 1 point.  INT...Hugh, are you saying that the base PER would now be 11-, regardless of INT?  Not sure about that...but I'll grant that's my personal biases (I loathe playing stupid characters, and I do it terribly) snarling.....  PRE/EGO...I wouldn't mind combining these, at 2 points per, or maybe 3 points for +2.  

[assault]

I think that eliminating figureds increases the number of moving parts in a system that already has too many moving parts.

I'm not at all bothered by superheroes having enough Dex, Spd and Con to be able to function as superheroes, nor, in say, Fantasy Hero, having "heavy fighters" that have the reflexes of Conan.

[Ninja-Bear]

I like having Figured Characteristics for Superheroes. For Heroic Level though No figured are better.

[Hugh Neilson]

8 hours ago, unclevlad said:

 

Not trying to be flippant, but...what do you mean?  MOST of the game uses characteristics in some form or another, so I really have no clue what you envision.

 

If we broke all the abilities of characteristics out and priced them independently, would we actually need characteristics at all?  To use STR as an example, we could price "doubled lifting" and "+1 DC with all HTH maneuvers". We already price all the former Figured and Leaping.  STR could then be eliminated.  Alternatively, it could be presented as a group of attributes with "Unified Power".

 

DEX provides skill roll bonuses and initiative.  Price Lightning Reflexes at +1 Initiative/1 point (with reduced pricing/limitations if it is restricted). Price +1 on all rolls based on agility or hand/eye coordination at 5 points and there's the other half of DEX.  Drop that down to 3 points for one type of roll at a time, or 1 for any single roll based on those attributes.  Fill it out with 4 points for all rolls in a related group, and 2 for any one roll in that related group.  This reprices or replaces skill levels.

 

PRE and INT get similar treatment for rolls.  +1 PRE attack costs 5 points as does +1 to all PER rolls.  Limit either to taste.  This also suggests INT and PRE cost 2, not 1, point under the current structure.

 

EGO can be +2 PRE defense for 1 point (PRE defense becomes exclusively EGO), +2 to EGO rolls for 3 points and +5 "mental power resistance" for 2 points.  That's 10 points for the equivalent of +10 EGO.

 

CON would require pricing CON rolls and defense against being stunned, but CON rolls are pretty infrequent, so just call CON the defense against being stunned and let the rolls lie.

 

8 hours ago, unclevlad said:

On figured vs. not...as noted, figured characteristics, principally STR and DEX, gave much too much in 5E.  In addition to the core aspects, 10 STR gave +2 PD, +2 REC, and +5 STUN.  In 5E, that's another 11 points.  DEX...seriously ugly.  3 DEX gives 3 points for SPD, and the big one...+1 OCV and +1 DCV.  That's 13 points.  Yeah, OK, DEX cost 3 in 5E, but still, it's 2 now.  The killer here is the boost to OCV and DCV.  Having the DEX cost 3 covers the SPD perfectly...but the OCV and DCV together are even more points overall, in many cases.  Note that by the rounding rules...going to an 11 DEX takes you to a 4 OCV and DCV.  1 point over the 6E cost for another 10 points of crucial benefits.  It's something that can easily get overlooked, since it's typically obscured.

 

Figured provided by CON were +2 ED, +2 REC, +5 STUN and +10 END, so 21 points.  10 CON cost 1 point less and provided CON rolls and resistance to being stunned.  In fairness, however, REC, STUN and END were overpriced.  How often did characters buy those up rather than buying more STR or CON?  The 6e repricing solves some of that issue.

 

As you note, rounding is another issue.  Consideration could also be given to whether OCV and DCV should be priced at 5 points each.  But DEX was the huge winner in 5.

 

8 hours ago, unclevlad said:

The alternative...increase the cost of STR...is a MESS.  It increases the END issues for many character types.  It clashes with TK, HA, HKA, the martial talents, and martial maneuvers.  I think in terms of supers, but it has an impact in fantasy, where weapons have STR mins.

 

STR has its own issues, made more complex by interaction with other ways to increase DCs.  Perhaps we should price +1 DC with all attacks, all ranged or HTH attacks, and more limited (such as HA's only damage, not other effects like holds and disarms).  This could then be used for repricing MA DCs (recalling that sweet 0 END), Deadly Blow et. al.

 

8 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Recosting...for no figured stats, I think Hugh's suggestions largely work.  It definitely works for DEX, IMO;  an alternate approach would split DEX into AGILITY (for skill rolls) and QUICKNESS (for initiative), where each are 1 point.  INT...Hugh, are you saying that the base PER would now be 11-, regardless of INT?  Not sure about that...but I'll grant that's my personal biases (I loathe playing stupid characters, and I do it terribly) snarling.....  PRE/EGO...I wouldn't mind combining these, at 2 points per, or maybe 3 points for +2.  

 

If we reprice INT at 2 points, then +5 would get +1 with INT rolls and PER rolls.  You could buy +1 with non-PER or +1 with PER for 5 points.  Agility replaces Skill Rolls in my model, and Quickness is just Lightning Reflexes.  DEX combines both.

 

I would not combine PRE and EGO - con artists need not be strong-willed, for example.  But I would remove  being cool under pressure (PRE defense) from being charismatic and move it to strength of will, etc. defined by EGO.  The two combined would cost 3 points for +2 under my model.

 

2 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

I like having Figured Characteristics for Superheroes. For Heroic Level though No figured are better.

 

I could go either way with costing addressed, but once all the component parts are fairly costed, is there a need to bundle so many together? Steve's logic makes sense to me, but I think presenting examples of the abilities bundled together, and/or guidelines of what other abilities might also be relevant to specific high characteristics, would also have made sense.

 

But a very healthy, fit character with low END and REC doesn't seem to make sense for Heroic or SuperHeroic.

[Doc Democracy]

9 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Not trying to be flippant, but...what do you mean?  MOST of the game uses characteristics in some form or another, so I really have no clue what you envision.

 

I guess I split characteristics into two types, one is the ability characteristics like STR, DEX, CON etc, the other type is mechanicals like SPD, DEF, STUN.

 

No way to get rid of the mechanical stuff, it us indeed part of the skeleton of the game.

 

Do we "need" STR?  It causes the mess you talk about, and @Hugh Neilson went through some of the other details (better than me). 

 

I think taking away those "ability" characteristics means you are left with skills and powers, it removes one of the three areas you need to think about when building a character. To me, it feels like a "purer" implementation of the system.

 

It would not stop you labelling a skills as an intelligence skill, or dexterity skill (to remove doubt when buying skills with all intelligence skills). 

 

Doc

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Beyond OCV and DCV...STR is complicated.  It's 1 point in 5E and 6E...even if we use 6E costs for REC and STUN, it's 6.5.  (The 5E costs to increase the figured characteristics are high.)  That...might be livable.  Or, drop the STUN boost, so +5 STR just gives +1 PD and +1 REC.  Yeah, it's a little something for nothing but it's not bad.  The alternative...increase the cost of STR...is a MESS.  It increases the END issues for many character types.  It clashes with TK, HA, HKA, the martial talents, and martial maneuvers.  I think in terms of supers, but it has an impact in fantasy, where weapons have STR mins.

 

OK If I was gonna reboot figured characteristics for a mythical 7th edition it would look something like this as a rough sketch

 

STR: no figured characteristics.  1 point per STR, it gives you lift, and no damage (bear with me here, there are plenty of concepts where something can lift a lot but not hit hard, like a forklift).  This reduces STR to a reasonable cost and utility.  You still get STR rolls for exertion, etc and STR "damage" rolls for STR vs STR contests and the like, you just don't hit harder.  If you want to hit harder you buy Normal Damage with the "STR adds damage" advantage rather than "range" advantage.

 

DEX: adds directly to SPD, but not CV.  Being agile does not necessarily make you better at combat, but it will affect your reflexes.  DEX costs 2 points per 1 DEX.

 

CON: adds to REC, END, and STN but costs 2 points per 1 CON.

 

INT: no figured characteristics, no changes.

EGO: costs 1, and every 3 adds +1 to MCV.  For games with starting MD, 1/5 Ego adds to that.

 

PRE: No changes

 

BOD: moved to primary again, adds 1 to REC and STN.  Costs 1 point per 1 Body

 

Nothing adds to defenses, which makes them kid of odd stand alone secondary or "figured" characteristics, but it feels to me like they ought to be broken out anyway, and nothing conceptually makes sense to add to either PD or ED.

 

PD, ED, REC, END, STN: no changes.

 

END: costs way too little now, its basically reduced Endurance to a trivial thing, you never really have to worry about running out.  1 point for 5 END is so cheap it renders the entire concept of END virtually meaningless.  So, increase the cost to 1 point for 3 END; its still fairly cheap, and works for the costs of primary stats, but makes Endurance more significant in the game.

 

Anyway, something like that.  To me this brings a proper balance to 

 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Christopher R Taylor

[Doc Democracy]

1 hour ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Anyway, something like that.  To me this brings a proper balance to 

 

Don't leave us hanging like this Christopher!  🙂

 

[Christopher R Taylor]

 I ran out of ink!

[unclevlad]

Hmm...reacting to CRT's stats rework, with figured stats.

 

STR...interesting, potentially.  Not sure it's sensible that there's no damage per se attached to the ability to throw a truck.  Also, what are the limits here?  Can I buy a 50 STR and 1d6 with STR adds to damage, and get an 11d6 punch?  

 

DEX:  I like it but I'd split it, as I noted, into AGI and QUICK.  AGI is 1 point per, QUICK is 2 points per.  QUICK adds to SPD.

 

CON:  this is good in concept.  The details will matter, more on this later.

 

EGO:  why does EGO add to ECV, when DEX doesn't add to standard CV?  EGO can't be 1 point per if it does this.

 

BODY:  if BODY becomes the baseline for REC, then everyone's getting a big boost there.  BODY is a weird stat to me, because there's such a push to make Transform do so much.  Also note that BODY did not add to REC in 5E...and it was 2 points per, just adding to STUN.

 

Now, the details...specifically, the costs of REC, END, and STUN.  These have to be considered.  

 

5E:  REC is 2, END is 1/2, STUN is 1

6E:  REC is 1, END is 1/5, STUN is 1/2

 

Granted, these relate to the difference between figured and not figured...the 6E costs had to be reduced to reflect the points losses.  I don't see a reason why 6E's costs for raising REC, END, or STUN over the baseline, couldn't be used with figured characteristics (FC).  FC gives the elevated baseline, just because you're doing that...doesn't mean these should be super expensive.

 

With what you've got...DEX is straightforward.  I'd say split as I suggested, and it's very clean.  It's CON and BODY.  

 

CON...let's start with 5E's calculations.  REC gains CON/5, END is 2x CON, STUN is CON/2.  With 6E's costs for additional REC/END/STUN, 10 CON gives 2 REC (2 points), 20 END (4 points), 5 STUN (2.5 points).  That's 8.5 points of benefit, for 10 points...not a good deal.  Simplest option?  STUN gets CON.  So 10 CON gives 10 STUN, which'd be 5 points.  You get 11 points of benefits for 10 points.  I also like this because of how STUN scales.  An alternate notion would be to have CON cost 3 points for +2 CON.  10 points of CON now costs 7.5 points for 8.5 points of benefits.  I'd rather NOT do 3 for 2 with primary characteristics, tho.

 

If BODY costs 1 per, then adding to STUN only, where STUN still costs 1 point per 5 STUN, means you get 6 points of benefit for 5 CP.  Huh, OK...that' works simply.

If BODY adds to REC...to what degree?  What's the formula?  In 5E, it's CON/5, so 5 BODY would give another +1 benefit.  Total's 7.  That's feeling like too much.  Also, just because you're big, doesn't mean you can recover...so I'd leave BODY at 1 and have it add to STUN only.

 

So...to consolidate...my suggestions..

STR:  has no figured stats.  (The issue about damage is separate.)  

DEX:  split into AGILITY (1 point) for skill checks, and QUICKNESS (2 points) for initiative.  QUICKNESS adds to SPD.

CON:  2 points.  REC gains CON/5, END is 2x CON,, STUN gains CON.

BODY:  1 point.  STUN gains BODY.

EGO:  the simpler approach is to leave it at 1 point, but it doesn't buy MCV at all.  This feels like it just gives too many points...if nothing else, buying back OMCV, which'd be totally painless for every non-psychic type.  That alone suggests having EGO add to ECV is not a great approach.  The non-egoist gets back the cost increase on his EGO while getting a useful boost to his mental defenses...he's a lot better off with a 6 DMCV than if he has a 3.  Against an 8 OMCV, we're talking 13- vs. 16-.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Having Body add to Stun just feels weird to me.  The two main damage stats are Body and Stun, it feels like they should be separate.  But healing faster and having a higher "life force" or structure seems reasonable and proper.  I dunno maybe other people have a better take on it.

 

Thinking about STR more, it kind of comes down to how stats typically do something other than rolls and figureds, and they usually do it for free,

STR gives you lift/exert

DEX gives you hit list rank

CON protects you from being stunned

EGO protects you from EGO attacks

PRE gives you presence attacks

INT gives you perception rolls.

BOD keeps you alive.

 

With that in mind, STR probably should add to damage but no figureds do you get 1d6 punch per 5 points, 1 point per 1 STR.  That's part of why I wanted jump separated from STR in 6th; it did too much for free.

[unclevlad]

It isn't that they're doing it for free.  It's the core function, the reason why you buy it.  Some are stronger than others...I've never been a fan of PRE attacks, for example.  I realize I may be an exception there.  But, that's ok.  Every characteristic has utility.  They don't all have to have equal versatility, even at the same cost.  The system granularity doesn't support it.

 

I have no problem removing Leap from STR.  They're not correlated at all.  How far do you think a power lifter can leap?  Heck, I've played with some 5E builds that are heavy on characteristics...and often sold back some of the leap, if the character was gonna be a flyer or use teleport.  I did have fun with a build that bought Leap...and even Megascale for the leap...for what'd work as a light-hearted villain.

 

As for BODY adding to STUN...you put it in yourself, man.   Big tends to be more durable.  NOT being stunned is also part of staying alive.  And, the two are on notably different scales anyway.  BODY is one of the awkward characteristics, tho.  Yes, it helps keep you alive, but if we consider Hero to be the root, then the point is NOT to kill.  This makes that function of BODY important, sure...but not gonna be invoked that often.  By the way people want to use Transform, arguably, the core function of BODY is to resist being Transformed.  Which...like being stunned...can largely be equated with staying alive.  Nothing says the core function has to be simple.   

 

Can also argue that BODY adds to STUN because STUN is critical.  The STUN from attacks scales up so fast, compared to, say the BODY.  How much of our purchased defenses are needed for not taking BODY...versus, reducing the STUN to something manageable?  It's why I'm a huge fan of both Damage Negation and Damage Reduction in principle, if not necessarily in practice.  

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

It isn't that they're doing it for free.  It's the core function, the reason why you buy it. 

 

Well that might not be the best way of putting it, but what I meant was, when we do an analysis of cost, you don't factor in these base things for each stat.

 

Quote

NOT being stunned is also part of staying alive.  And, the two are on notably different scales anyway.

 

That's a fair argument, it just feels bad mechanically and in terms of game design.

[Hugh Neilson]

On 8/1/2023 at 12:33 PM, unclevlad said:

Now, the details...specifically, the costs of REC, END, and STUN.  These have to be considered.  

 

5E:  REC is 2, END is 1/2, STUN is 1

6E:  REC is 1, END is 1/5, STUN is 1/2

 

Granted, these relate to the difference between figured and not figured...the 6E costs had to be reduced to reflect the points losses.  I don't see a reason why 6E's costs for raising REC, END, or STUN over the baseline, couldn't be used with figured characteristics (FC).  FC gives the elevated baseline, just because you're doing that...doesn't mean these should be super expensive.

 

In my view, the reduced costs in 6e better reflect utility. It was rare at best to see anyone buy STUN, REC or END rather than just buy more stats that provided Figured.  Even without Figured, do you want +1 REC (to get back 1 STUN and END from a recovery) or defenses and reduced END?  How often did anyone say "I run out of END too fast - I'll buy more END and REC" instead of "I'll slap on reduced END"?  Fixing the price of these abilities was also factored into the possible retention of Figured.  CON at 2 points makes more sense if +10 CON gets you +2 ED (2 CP), +2 REC (2 CP), +5 STUN (2.5 CP) and +20 END (4 CP) for a total of 10.5 CP instead of 21 CP.

 

On 8/1/2023 at 10:59 AM, Christopher R Taylor said:

STR: no figured characteristics.  1 point per STR, it gives you lift, and no damage (bear with me here, there are plenty of concepts where something can lift a lot but not hit hard, like a forklift).  This reduces STR to a reasonable cost and utility.  You still get STR rolls for exertion, etc and STR "damage" rolls for STR vs STR contests and the like, you just don't hit harder.  If you want to hit harder you buy Normal Damage with the "STR adds damage" advantage rather than "range" advantage.

 

STR is the toughest one due to the link to damage.  I think it should add to (or be the base method of obtaining) HTH damage.  Damage with no range costs 10 points per 3d6. We just need to assess what else you get for the extra 5 CP paid for STR.  If the system were less generous with thrown objects of opportunity, Lift would not be as valuable.  Start with "no one is proficient at throwing a car so -3 OCV", add in penalties for throwing bulky non-aerodynamic objects; give large objects OCV bonuses instead of AoE ("SpiderDude nimbly leaps through one window of the bus and out a window on the other side").  We have Martial maneuvers to trip, disarm, etc. at range.  Put some work into defining the use of normal combat maneuvers with ranged attacks.  What stops a character from Blasting a target's feet out from under him (Trip), Pushing the target back rather than targeting for damage (Shove; Throw), Blasting out of a gGrab or Entangle (Escape) or Blasting the gun out of the target's hand (Disarm)? In addition to a bit of leveling of the playing field with STR, we  get more tactical and cinematic options in combat.

 

On 8/1/2023 at 10:59 AM, Christopher R Taylor said:

DEX: adds directly to SPD, but not CV.  Being agile does not necessarily make you better at combat, but it will affect your reflexes.  DEX costs 2 points per 1 DEX.

 

So for one point, DEX boosts all DEX rolls and provides initiative in combat? 

 

Basically, adding SPD reduces the cost of DEX by 1 point.  I prefer just buying SPD direct, especially with no other Figured's.

 

The only way I see DEX, INT and PRE at 1 point each comes with a BIG reduction to the costs of buying their effects separately.  +1 to all DEX rolls (with no initiative) and +5 Lightning Reflexes (with no DEX roll increase) should combine to a cost comparable to +5 DEX (with no SPD boost).

 

On 8/1/2023 at 10:59 AM, Christopher R Taylor said:

CON: adds to REC, END, and STN but costs 2 points per 1 CON.

 

This is just math. If +10 CON gets +2 REC (2 CP) + 5 STUN (2.5 CP) and +20 END (6.67 CP at 3 END per CP), so 11.17 points of Figured, the actual resistance to being STUNned and occasional other effect is costing 8.83 points.

 

Overall, I would also say there is no "No Figured" limitation - you can just sell back the Figureds. If the base stat is limited, reduce the points recovered from any sellbacks using the same limitation.

 

On 8/1/2023 at 10:59 AM, Christopher R Taylor said:

INT: no figured characteristics, no changes.

 

PRE: No changes

 

Again, skill levels need to be fixed to align with the stat costs.  3 points for +1 to any CHAR based skill roll at a time is highway robbery when I can pay 5 points for +1 to all those rolls at once (complementary skills, anyone?) AND get all the other benefits of +5 to the stat.  I would also remove PRE def from PRE.

 

On 8/1/2023 at 10:59 AM, Christopher R Taylor said:

EGO: costs 1, and every 3 adds +1 to MCV.  For games with starting MD, 1/5 Ego adds to that.

 

So what to mOCV and mDCV cost?  And why isn't OCV and DCV linked  to a stat?  I would leave EGO at one point, but it would also be the PRE Def stat. Strong-willed people are harder to PRE attack.

 

On 8/1/2023 at 10:59 AM, Christopher R Taylor said:

BOD: moved to primary again, adds 1 to REC and STN.  Costs 1 point per 1 Body

 

If +10 BOD adds +10 STUN (5 CP) and 2 REC (2 CP), BOD is pretty cheap at 1 point, don't you think?

 

On 8/1/2023 at 10:59 AM, Christopher R Taylor said:

END: costs way too little now, its basically reduced Endurance to a trivial thing, you never really have to worry about running out.  1 point for 5 END is so cheap it renders the entire concept of END virtually meaningless.  So, increase the cost to 1 point for 3 END; its still fairly cheap, and works for the costs of primary stats, but makes Endurance more significant in the game.

 

How do we reprice END batteries under this model?  At 6e pricing, buying up REC and END instead of buying reduced END was viable, but it still isn't common. That suggests, to me, that END is not as underpriced as you suggest.  Increase the price of END and I should probably look at more REC and/or reduced END.

 

What is a standard character's starting STUN, REC and END under your model?  Is there a base + Figured, or does a Normal have 4 REC (1/5 CON and 1/5 BOD), 15 STUN (BOD + 1/2 CON) and 20 END (2x CON)?  That's only STUN that changes, of course.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

If +10 BOD adds +10 STUN (5 CP) and 2 REC (2 CP), BOD is pretty cheap at 1 point, don't you think?

 

I'm willing to get rid of the Stun contribution entirely for reasons stated above, so 12 points for 10 is not too bad a return.

 

Quote

How do we reprice END batteries under this model?

 

Other than just dumping END Batteries entirely, it probably would require a bit of a look at the pricing for the power.  But 5 END for 1 point means that you throw those extra 3 points at the end of build and get +15 END, it really is just too inexpensive.  The low, low, low cost of END has trivialized it; everyone can have enormous END for virtually no points.

[Sketchpad]

I don't mind not having figured characteristics. I'm sure for some new players entering the game, it's a bit more attractive without them. 

 

On 8/1/2023 at 4:48 PM, Christopher R Taylor said:

INT gives you perception rolls.

 

Honestly, I've given thought to just making Perception an INT-based skill. 

[unclevlad]

1 hour ago, Sketchpad said:

Honestly, I've given thought to just making Perception an INT-based skill. 

 

It already is.  It's just free because you can't have interaction without perception.

[Tech]

My group still uses Figured Characteristics and likes them. We've long since found ways to prevent 'cookie cutter characters' as Lonewolf said.