DEX vs. CSLs

[Sean Waters]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

you know I just look at the little related threads thing at the bottom of other threads and don't really notice the dates of the related thread I go to:nonp:.

 

Do I get to be in the record book? Get a syndrome named after me?

 

 

Steamteck Syndrome. Nice ring

[Vulcan]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

For what it's worth, my opinion is that skill levels reflect a character's actual level of skill at doing something. Raw DEX (or INT, or PRE) rolls is a basic level of proficiency matched with whatever degree of native talent the character has. Levels in a skill (or group of skills) reflects greater proficiency in the skill.

 

Combat skill levels are similar. Raw CV is native talent and/or superhuman reflexes. Skill levels reflect training and experience.

 

So Batman having a 20 DEX and a shipload of skill levels sounds right to me. Batman with a 36 DEX 'because it's more point efficient' does not sound right to me.

[JmOz]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

But is it FAIR to allow the "I'm a mutant" to get significant point savings over Mr.Skill because they came up with a concept that allows for it...I think that you need to look at fairness to all of your players above concept...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

So Batman having a 20 DEX and a shipload of skill levels sounds right to me. Batman with a 36 DEX 'because it's more point efficient' does not sound right to me.

 

What does not sound right to ME is that it would be materially more point efficient to achieve the EXACT SAME mechanical effects through two different approaches.

 

There are only two choices:

 

(a) it is way cheaper to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a superheroic game

 

( it is way more expensive to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a heroic game

 

NCM forces this issue. In my view, NCM should go and skill levels should be priced such that building Batman with skill levels or raw DEX will have a similar, ideally identical, cost.

[JmOz]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

So Batman having a 20 DEX and a shipload of skill levels sounds right to me. Batman with a 36 DEX 'because it's more point efficient' does not sound right to me.

 

What does not sound right to ME is that it would be materially more point efficient to achieve the EXACT SAME mechanical effects through two different approaches.

 

There are only two choices:

 

(a) it is way cheaper to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a superheroic game

 

( it is way more expensive to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a heroic game

 

NCM forces this issue. In my view, NCM should go and skill levels should be priced such that building Batman with skill levels or raw DEX will have a similar, ideally identical, cost.

 

QFT: until then I think Fairness to the players (Not characters BTW, but the players) is more important than any concept that might be in play.

[Vondy]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

I'm not going to dispute the fact that Dex is more efficient.

 

Instead, I'm going to state that in terms of genre convention and character conception, it is often less appropriate.

 

I want to see characters that are built to genre and concept. In superheroic settings characters are often characteristic driven and run on higher power levels, so I don't have too many problems with Dex-amping. In heroic games they need to fit the genre and concept. As a result, in those games I take a dim view of Dex-amping. In those games, there tend to be characteristic thresholds, and when you reach those thresholds, combat skill levels become competitive. The issue becomes players pumping their Dex to 20/30 even if its not in concept. There are ways to stop them, the simplest being "no."

 

I understand the math, but that doesn't mean I approve of it, or think it makes for good role playing. Roll playing, certainly. Gamist style play, certainly. But not role playing.

 

I've addressed this by running something a lot of people wouldn't call Hero. I have my own hero light that looks a lot like Hero, but isn't. It runs on a boiled down set of hero mechanics with some custom replacements. I've stopped using CVs altogether. I don't like their effect on play. They create an non-granular to hit roll irrespective of actual combat skill, and they lead, due to mathematical realities, to the kind of thinking that underlies Gary's arguments. I've moved to skill based combat, instead. Dex is still important because most combat skills are Dex-based, as is initiative, but its much easier to manage, and makes skill levels more competitive. It also allows you to use a skill-maxima across the board (combat and non-combat), which promotes the purchase of skill levels (as I allow 3, 5, and 8 point levels to push a character beyond the skill maxima).

[Vulcan]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

So Batman having a 20 DEX and a shipload of skill levels sounds right to me. Batman with a 36 DEX 'because it's more point efficient' does not sound right to me.

 

What does not sound right to ME is that it would be materially more point efficient to achieve the EXACT SAME mechanical effects through two different approaches.

 

There are only two choices:

 

(a) it is way cheaper to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a superheroic game

 

( it is way more expensive to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a heroic game

 

NCM forces this issue. In my view, NCM should go and skill levels should be priced such that building Batman with skill levels or raw DEX will have a similar, ideally identical, cost.

 

The nice thing about Batman is that someone who hits him with a 'power supression field' is in for a big surprise - an advantage not shared by the guy with a 36 DEX. Even if you do have NCM, a 36 DEX is not normal.

[Vulcan]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

I'm not going to dispute the fact that Dex is more efficient.

 

Instead, I'm going to state that in terms of genre convention and character conception, it is often less appropriate.

 

Thank you. That was exactly the point I was trying to make.

 

If you want to play a skilled normal, that's fine. That's your choice. But a 36 DEX isn't normal. Period. Once your DEX exceeds 20, you're getting into an abnormally high ability range and you're probably a superpowered being. Once you exceed 30, there's no way around it, you're definitely a superpowered being of some sort.

[JmOz]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

Thank you. That was exactly the point I was trying to make.

 

If you want to play a skilled normal, that's fine. That's your choice. But a 36 DEX isn't normal. Period. Once your DEX exceeds 20, you're getting into an abnormally high ability range and you're probably a superpowered being. Once you exceed 30, there's no way around it, you're definitely a superpowered being of some sort.

 

 

Hero is at it's core a game of Special effects, you come up with the effect first and then you try to find the element that works best for it. If my effect is I am a great combatant then buying dex is a legitimet way to get to it. The problem with all of these arguments is they take a stance of "This is what dex means" it would be like saying every energy blast is "Photonic discharges". Dex, like EVERYTHING else in hero is a game element without a F/X

 

FURTHER MORE and more importantly: Are you really willing to tell the PLAYER of the Batman homage: Sorry you have to spend 30 points more than the guy who says "I'm a mutant with the mutant power that I am simply better than a normal person in everything" to get to a lesser point?

 

Concept is great, but to often we forget the human (aka PLAYER not character) element, I value treating my friends fairly over some theroretical this is how the character should be built.

 

Now it should be noted that this is a refrence to champions for the most part, as it is IMO the most common genre to have characters going past NCM by a considerable amount, other genres things might be different

 

As for genre element, well I don't think the stunts Batman, daredevil, nightwing,. etc...do is within a human guideline, put simply, in the big two universes it really seems you can train beyond human limits because it is a comic and we want to see NIghtwing do a triple summersault off the sides of a building and land on a moving train while dodging bullet fire.

[Vondy]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

 

Now it should be noted that this is a refrence to champions for the most part, as it is IMO the most common genre to have characters going past NCM by a considerable amount, other genres things might be different

 

As for genre element, well I don't think the stunts Batman, daredevil, nightwing,. etc...do is within a human guideline

 

When I run superheroic games, which is once in a blue moon these days, my philosophy is "screw it." Superheroes are super, period. They aren't normal humans, even if they are theoretically just highly skilled (like Batman). Its not a remotely realistic genre to start with. Batman is about as normal as some high falutin pagan hero out of Greek mythology.

 

When I run heroic games - and this is my bread and butter, and the perspective I post from - I generally have a hard cap of 20 with the caveat that characters can hit the 20-30 range if its genre apropos and they have a "shtick stat." Because of this I see a lot more skill levels. We negotiate concepts and "shtick" at the start of play so everyone feels they got their niche fair and square.

 

I also see them because I generally impose a skill maxima of 13- for most games, with characters only going over if their "shtick stat" has a greater base roll, or they have skill levels in the form of relevant talents (i.e., crack shot: small arms +3) - or both.

 

Again, however, I run opposed skill based combat rolls, and MoS based initiative rolls, so its not the normal OCV/DCV paradigm, and DEX is already a little bit less efficient, though its still a good buy because it sets your base roll for your combat skills.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

I'm not going to dispute the fact that Dex is more efficient.

 

Instead, I'm going to state that in terms of genre convention and character conception, it is often less appropriate.

 

Why should it be more efficient? If my character concept is "I'm a great combatant", why should it be more expensive to get there because I am a normal human with vast training who has pushed himself to be the very best, or because I am a cyborg with a supercomputer combat simulator for a brain? These are two different SFX with exactly the same mechanical result.

 

If points are intended to balance two different characters, and those two characters have exactly the same mechanical abilities, it seems to me they are perfectly balanced. If they spend different amounts of points to get exactly the same results, the points are defeating their intended purpose - they are making the the characters NOT balance.

 

I want to see characters that are built to genre and concept. In superheroic settings characters are often characteristic driven and run on higher power levels' date=' so I don't have too many problems with Dex-amping. In heroic games they need to fit the genre and concept. As a result, in those games I take a dim view of Dex-amping. In those games, there tend to be characteristic thresholds, and when you reach those thresholds, combat skill levels become competitive. The issue becomes players pumping their Dex to 20/30 even if its not in concept. There are ways to stop them, the simplest being "no." [/quote']

 

The system seems to concur, by imposing a point in heroic campaigns where those skill levels become more cost-effective than buying DEX.

 

I understand the math' date=' but that doesn't mean I approve of it, or think it makes for good role playing. Roll playing, certainly. Gamist style play, certainly. But not role playing.[/quote']

 

To me, role playing is driven by the choices the characters make, not their abilities. The skilled normal and the supercomputer cyborg can both be role played exactly the same, or they can be role played very differently. Whether that highly skilled normal, who is driven by his personal goals and motivations to excel, and has his own emotional baggage as a consequence, achieves his combat prowess by purchasing skill levels or a 36 DEX will not impact the manner in which he is role played at all.

 

The players and the GM's can see the difference between DEX and skill levels. The characters can only see the result - his ability in combat is superhuman. Whether this character's intensity, drive, training and work resulted in the addition of combat skill levels or of DEX, the result is the same as far as the game mechanics are concerned.

 

I've addressed this by running something a lot of people wouldn't call Hero. I have my own hero light that looks a lot like Hero' date=' but isn't. [/quote']

 

To rephrase, I would suggest you have made all characters pay similar points to achieve similar combat capabilities. How we get there is much less important than whether we get there.

 

The nice thing about Batman is that someone who hits him with a 'power supression field' is in for a big surprise - an advantage not shared by the guy with a 36 DEX. Even if you do have NCM' date=' a 36 DEX is [i']not normal.[/i]

 

That 36 DEX is the mechanic by which the abilities are designed. Whether it is "normal" is entirely within the purview of the player. If Batman and Flash are in a "super power suppression field", Flash's DEX will fall and Batman's will not. If they are subjected to an Amnesia Drug, Batman no longer remembers all that training, so he loses DEX, while Flash's DEX is unchanged.

 

It is the players and the GM imposing an arbitrary SFX on that 36 DEX which results in any mechanical difference from the suppression field, not the Hero System mechanics themselves.

 

If we want to take a pure mechanical approach, Bats should buy the 36 DEX anyway and invest some of the savings over CSL's in Power Defense limited to "super power suppression" effects, because he has no super powers.

 

Hero is at it's core a game of Special effects, you come up with the effect first and then you try to find the element that works best for it. If my effect is I am a great combatant then buying dex is a legitimet way to get to it. The problem with all of these arguments is they take a stance of "This is what dex means" it would be like saying every energy blast is "Photonic discharges". Dex, like EVERYTHING else in hero is a game element without a F/X

 

FURTHER MORE and more importantly: Are you really willing to tell the PLAYER of the Batman homage: Sorry you have to spend 30 points more than the guy who says "I'm a mutant with the mutant power that I am simply better than a normal person in everything" to get to a lesser point?

 

Concept is great, but to often we forget the human (aka PLAYER not character) element, I value treating my friends fairly over some theroretical this is how the character should be built.

 

Now it should be noted that this is a reference to champions for the most part, as it is IMO the most common genre to have characters going past NCM by a considerable amount, other genres things might be different

 

As for genre element, well I don't think the stunts Batman, daredevil, nightwing,. etc...do is within a human guideline, put simply, in the big two universes it really seems you can train beyond human limits because it is a comic and we want to see NIghtwing do a triple summersault off the sides of a building and land on a moving train while dodging bullet fire.

 

Well said - this covers the issue exactly.

 

All that the imposition of a "character concept tax" accomplishes is the discouragement of the concept that is excessively taxed in favour of one that is subject to less, or no, tax. Make my Normal Human too expensive to be competitive, and my answer is to put that character sheet in the binder and play something that is allowed to be point-competitive in your game (which means a superhuman, apparently). I'll dust off the normal human when someone else, who will let him be as efficient as the other characters, is running the game.

[Trebuchet]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

All that the imposition of a "character concept tax" accomplishes is the discouragement of the concept that is excessively taxed in favour of one that is subject to less' date=' or no, tax. Make my Normal Human too expensive to be competitive, and my answer is to put that character sheet in the binder and play something that is allowed to be point-competitive in your game (which means a superhuman, apparently). I'll dust off the normal human when someone else, who will let him be as efficient as the other characters, is running the game.[/quote']QFT.

 

The means we use to get there (DEX vs CSL) shouldn't be any more relevant mechanically than Limited vs inate abilities. Both have their own pluses and minuses which should become apparent during actual game play (as opposed to during the character design stage).

[Trebuchet]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

As for genre element' date=' well I don't think the stunts Batman, daredevil, nightwing,. etc...do is within a human guideline, put simply, in the big two universes it really seems you can train beyond human limits because it is a comic and we want to see Nightwing do a triple summersault off the sides of a building and land on a moving train while dodging bullet fire.[/quote']Repped.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

For what it's worth' date=' my opinion is that skill levels reflect a character's actual [i']level of skill[/i] at doing something. Raw DEX (or INT, or PRE) rolls is a basic level of proficiency matched with whatever degree of native talent the character has. Levels in a skill (or group of skills) reflects greater proficiency in the skill.

 

Combat skill levels are similar. Raw CV is native talent and/or superhuman reflexes. Skill levels reflect training and experience.

 

So Batman having a 20 DEX and a shipload of skill levels sounds right to me. Batman with a 36 DEX 'because it's more point efficient' does not sound right to me.

 

Wow, It lives!! The thread lives!!!!

 

I'm in total agreement on this one with you. I completely disagree with the 'You're imposing an arbitrary FX on DEX crowd" myself. It just gets way way too squishy whats going on. frankly in my games because skill levels can be used for so many things and because it represents a competent skills character as opposed to raw talent. Lots more points is spent on them and they're extremely effective.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

So Batman having a 20 DEX and a shipload of skill levels sounds right to me. Batman with a 36 DEX 'because it's more point efficient' does not sound right to me.

 

What does not sound right to ME is that it would be materially more point efficient to achieve the EXACT SAME mechanical effects through two different approaches.

 

There are only two choices:

 

(a) it is way cheaper to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a superheroic game

 

( it is way more expensive to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a heroic game

 

NCM forces this issue. In my view, NCM should go and skill levels should be priced such that building Batman with skill levels or raw DEX will have a similar, ideally identical, cost.

 

 

 

NCM should remain. I find an invaluable concept tool . Adjust it somehow but its really really nice to have a human/superhuman dividing line. Maybe it could be expanded into something like "mere mortal"

 

Reprice skill levels maybe. however Hugh, you're a real expert guy, I know you don't really think they produce the same exact results. No, not the same results at all.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

I'm in total agreement on this one with you. I completely disagree with the 'You're imposing an arbitrary FX on DEX crowd" myself. It just gets way way too squishy whats going on. frankly in my games because skill levels can be used for so many things and because it represents a competent skills character as opposed to raw talent. Lots more points is spent on them and they're extremely effective.

 

I guess it depends on whether you believe that characteristics should follow the HERO philosophy of mechanics do not equal effects or that they are unique in the system in that they are (always?) exactly what they represent.

 

Personally I think, that if we are to keep characteristics in the form they are in they should come within the HERO philosophy of SFX being laid on top of a set of mechanics.

 

I do not think that any player should have his mechanics dictated to him because of his choice of background to his character. If he wants a high OCV in combat you can accomplish that two ways, he should not be charged more points simply because the GM thinks that the description of the character means that he should purchase the high OCV via skill levels rather than DEX.

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

What does not sound right to ME is that it would be materially more point efficient to achieve the EXACT SAME mechanical effects through two different approaches.

 

There are only two choices:

 

(a) it is way cheaper to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a superheroic game

 

( it is way more expensive to attain the same results through characteristics than through skill levels in a heroic game.

 

NCM forces this issue. In my view, NCM should go and skill levels should be priced such that building Batman with skill levels or raw DEX will have a similar, ideally identical, cost.

 

The quotes appear to be off in a lot of posts.

 

NCM should remain. I find an invaluable concept tool . Adjust it somehow but its really really nice to have a human/superhuman dividing line. Maybe it could be expanded into something like "mere mortal"

 

Reprice skill levels maybe. however Hugh, you're a real expert guy, I know you don't really think they produce the same exact results. No, not the same results at all.

 

Are the results identical? No. Are skill levels overpriced? Yes, in a Supers game. But reprice them to be appropriate in a superheroic game, and they will be far too cheap in a heroic game where NCM applies.

 

And NCM is not "mere mortal". It is "pays double for characteristics above NCM". It doesn't mean you can't fly, or fire energy beams from your eyes, or read and control the minds of those around you. It means that, if you buy characteristics without limitations, you pay double for them.

 

Batman should just take NCM, a 20 DEX and a 4 SPD, then buy +36 DEX, +3 SPD with "must maintain training regimen, -0". Now they are a power instead of characteristics, so no doubling should apply. Just like Defender's OIF Armor lets him circumvent the cost of his characteristics despite his NCM disadvantage.

 

NCM is a bizarre and, in my view, inappropriate, disadvantage in that you don't take it to define your character, but to define how you spend your points. Should a Brick get points for "ranged attacks cost double", or "mental powers cost double", or "martial arts cost double"? There's no reason, to me, that a disadvantage should be available for how the character chooses to spend his points. You will never see a Brick or Martial Artist in a Supers game select the NCM disadvantage - only a character who doesn't lose more than 20 points from its effects would ever do so. The "disadvantage" can basically be rephrased "things I don't buy anyway would cost double if I did".

 

"DEX above X can only come from being a superhuman, not from any other SFX" is no different from:

 

- "STR must come from muscle power", so your cyborg has to buy Telekinesis, no Range, since his cyborg arms don't represent superhuman powers.

 

- "PRE has to reflect a bizarre appearance" Captain America can't have superhuman PRE!

 

- "That's superhuman INT your character can't have that and be a normal human" - Tony Stark has to buy skill levels. Reed Richards can only have INT if he defines it as resulting from cosmic ray mutation, not if he was smart to begin with.

 

Deciding my character is a normal human with vast training and access to gadgets is no different from deciding he's a mythological god, a space alien, an otherdimensional traveller or a mutant - it's a background. Backgrounds should not cost or grant points. The advantages and drawbacks that background provides should grant or cost points.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

I guess it depends on whether you believe that characteristics should follow the HERO philosophy of mechanics do not equal effects or that they are unique in the system in that they are (always?) exactly what they represent.

 

Personally I think, that if we are to keep characteristics in the form they are in they should come within the HERO philosophy of SFX being laid on top of a set of mechanics.

 

I do not think that any player should have his mechanics dictated to him because of his choice of background to his character. If he wants a high OCV in combat you can accomplish that two ways, he should not be charged more points simply because the GM thinks that the description of the character means that he should purchase the high OCV via skill levels rather than DEX.

 

Doc

 

Pretty much disagree with you 100% . If you want a skilled character buy skills if your want Spider-Man buy DEX. Only agreement is maybe pricing should be adjusted but since skill monkeys seem to kick butt better than DEX monkey's in our games maybe not.

Personally I think I read more mechanics equal effects to the system that you do. One of the best way to confuse new or old players is to divore things so that things aren't what they claim to be. (God I really hate that philosophy quote its and excuse for lots of really insane builds and stuff like "brick tricks" . One of my personal major hatreds)

[ghost-angel]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

If you want to get to the same place at the same cost both ways you really end up with one mechanic with two labels. Why put it twice in the book.

 

At that point just called it Dex and Limited Dex.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

Pretty much disagree with you 100% . If you want a skilled character buy skills if your want Spider-Man buy DEX. Only agreement is maybe pricing should be adjusted but since skill monkeys seem to kick butt better than DEX monkey's in our games maybe not.

Personally I think I read more mechanics equal effects to the system that you do. One of the best way to confuse new or old players is to divore things so that things aren't what they claim to be. (God I really hate that philosophy quote its and excuse for lots of really insane builds and stuff like "brick tricks" . One of my personal major hatreds)

 

So you dont use energy blast for anything except energy blasts??

 

This is pretty much core HERO...even direct reading from the rulebook says that. Why should it be different for one category of things??

 

Doc

[Guest steamteck]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

The quotes appear to be off in a lot of posts.

 

 

 

Are the results identical? No. Are skill levels overpriced? Yes, in a Supers game. But reprice them to be appropriate in a superheroic game, and they will be far too cheap in a heroic game where NCM applies.

 

And NCM is not "mere mortal". It is "pays double for characteristics above NCM". It doesn't mean you can't fly, or fire energy beams from your eyes, or read and control the minds of those around you. It means that, if you buy characteristics without limitations, you pay double for them.

 

.

 

I know its not "mere mortal" I said maybe it should be expanded not eliminated.

 

Most your examples I would agree they should be kept in human norm and give skill levels except for Cap and the cyborg where you entered bizarro land for a moment. I also loathe loath loath the "defender exploit also. Well no ones going to convince anyone I thing we have extremely different character design philosophies.

 

In the end we both have to believe in our worlds enough to play in them and commit enough to role play. Designs which to my mind don't really represent what's going make me not believe in the character. Fortunately for me I'm the moderate in the group so I've never had to worry about points vs our feeling character concept and fortunately after 20 plus year together we're all on the same page.

 

If to your mind 36 DEX Batman works more power to you. I'm just saying it completely utterly absolutely seems wrong to me so I'd never do it that way and I'm glad HERO lets me do my way.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

So you dont use energy blast for anything except energy blasts??

 

This is pretty much core HERO...even direct reading from the rulebook says that. Why should it be different for one category of things??

 

Doc

 

 

There's a subtle difference going on here I'm obviously not getting across. I'm sorry its very different. Energy blasts say its for many different effects but skill is skill and DEX is DEX. You get to two different places with them places which perfectly match their labels IMO.

With that philosophy taken to a few extra extremes why not take extra levels in DCV and claim you''re bulletproof and bullets bounce off you even though you have not resistant defense and your opponent is just not making his attack roll?

[Guest steamteck]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

Thank you. That was exactly the point I was trying to make.

 

If you want to play a skilled normal, that's fine. That's your choice. But a 36 DEX isn't normal. Period. Once your DEX exceeds 20, you're getting into an abnormally high ability range and you're probably a superpowered being. Once you exceed 30, there's no way around it, you're definitely a superpowered being of some sort.

 

 

Boy, I can really stir things up by posting on old threads can't I?

 

Sorry can't rep you again yet. I agree on the definitely superpowered being thing but obviously others disagree Well I think the two philosophies will never meet. fortunately we can both do it our own way as long as we're not in each others games.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

There's a subtle difference going on here I'm obviously not getting across. I'm sorry its very different. Energy blasts say its for many different effects but skill is skill and DEX is DEX. You get to two different places with them places which perfectly match their labels IMO.

 

Please let me say that I dont think levels and DEX are equivalent. They perform things slightly differently. The one thing they both do is alter CV. What I am saying is that requiring one player to purchase a more expensive way to increase CV simply because they chose the 'wrong' special effect for the increase.

 

While that might be fixed by changing the balance between DEX and levels, I'm not sure I think the role of the GM is to dictate such things, just to point out the differences of approach and what those might mean playing in his game...

 

With that philosophy taken to a few extra extremes why not take extra levels in DCV and claim you''re bulletproof and bullets bounce off you even though you have not resistant defense and your opponent is just not making his attack roll?

 

 

In fact I actually did exactly that in a thread recently.

 

There is a small amount of handwavium as described in Fantasy Hero. You buy enough DCV to agree it as absolute. If an attack never hits then it also never does damage. The rest is all in the description of the effects.

 

As you say, we are not going to convince each other and I'm sure we both enjoy playing HERO in the way we want. I suppose the purpose of talking is to ensure that we get insight into how other people play the game.

 

Doc

[Guest steamteck]

Re: DEX vs. CSLs

 

Actually it does help in several ways I think.we both (all) get greater insights into our approaches and its always good to exercise the old thinking cap.

 

That's really funny you did purpose the DCV thing . I guess I understand your approach even if I disagree with it.