Ncm:15

[UltraRob]

Re: Ncm:15

 

But then I suppose you'd have the mathmaticians trying to figure out the most efficient cost for Dex based on whether it would be better to buy CSL's or Dexterity at some given value Can't win it seems.

 

Another thing you can try is to have characters roll randomly for their own unique normal characteristic maxima. This would give some variety to characters, as they all have their own distinct limitations in different characteristics. A slow witted warrior may have a high NCM for STR (19 for example), but a low NCM for intelligence (13 perhaps) - it is easier for him to become stronger than smarter.

 

 

That might be a valid approach, although I know many on here will balk at the idea...Say each character rolls their NCM as 10+2D6(+Racial Modifier?) and those are the effective limits of the character's natural ability before they have to start really pushing themselves to achieve improvement. In this case the only question would be whether they had to take the NCM limiters where they lay, or could put them where they felt they best suited the character. (In effect we just made HERO into D&D...)

 

Hmmm...the more I think about it...the "just don't bother with NCM" approach might just be the ticket...The graduated cost idea is cool, but would require a chart to hand to the players...Then again, that isn't anything new for HERO, is it?

 

Rob

[UltraRob]

Re: Ncm:15

 

Out of sheer curiosity...Costs per point in a graduated scale...

 

So: STR:18 costs 1+1+1+2+2+2+3+3= 15pts

 

Cost for: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24

Attribute:

STR: 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5

DEX: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

CON: 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7

BODY: 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7

INT: 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5

EGO: 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7

PRE: 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5

COM: .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

 

Or, in real numbers:

 

STR: x1 1 2 3 5 7 9 12 15 18 22 26 30 35

DEX: x3 1 3 6 10 15 21 28 36 45 55 66 78 91

CON: X2 1 3 6 8 11 14 18 22 27 32 38 46 53

 

And other costs would be much the same accordingly...

[Gunrunner]

Re: Ncm:15

 

That might be a valid approach, although I know many on here will balk at the idea...Say each character rolls their NCM as 10+2D6(+Racial Modifier?) and those are the effective limits of the character's natural ability before they have to start really pushing themselves to achieve improvement. In this case the only question would be whether they had to take the NCM limiters where they lay, or could put them where they felt they best suited the character. (In effect we just made HERO into D&D...)

 

Hmmm...the more I think about it...the "just don't bother with NCM" approach might just be the ticket...The graduated cost idea is cool, but would require a chart to hand to the players...Then again, that isn't anything new for HERO, is it?

 

Rob

 

Personally, I would allow the characters to put their NCM limiters to whatever characteristic they want. As far as saying that such would make HERO into D&D, I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. Players still have a LOT of control over how they want to make their characters, especially if you allow them to pick which characteristics on which to place their NCM limiters. They can still have whatever value they want for each characteristic, it would just encourage more unique characters. I'd be more apt to call it HERO with a touch of D&D.

 

As far as your scale Rob: yes, that is kinda what I had in mind

[Markdoc]

Re: Ncm:15

 

I'd expect lowering NCM to decrease variety: DEX is good for most people, as is SPD, so I'd expect characteristics to cluster around 13 for most things and people to max out on the same things. Players who might like an 18 PRE will probably balk at 11 points for it - They'd be better off going for 13 and a PRE skill level.

 

My experience is the same as it ever was - if players are clustering up at the top end of NCM, that's a sign you are starting them off on too many points.

 

cheers, Mark

[Lezentauw]

Re: Ncm:15

 

Yeah, I do have to admit that the old FH way of just playing with the NCM for each race made a lot of sense. Although I think that's more of a metagaming thing than something to do within the rules like the old FH tried to do. The GM should just set the ranges and that's how it is, just like human NCM is.

 

Here's an interesting point, though...How in HERO would you make it so Elves are naturally better archers when the prime stat for any combat is still DEX? There's really nothing there to encourage archers over light fighters, except maybe a low ability to take hits due to a low CON. (Which I guess might do it...)

 

I guess they could have natural PSLs to represent their ability to target...but that seems a little odd.

 

Rob

 

I am changing the Elves +1 sight per to +2 Telescopic vision. I am doing this to represent that Elves can see farther than a normal person. This alone should account for elves being better archers, as they will be to shoot at range a bit better than most races do.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Ncm:15

 

I am changing the Elves +1 sight per to +2 Telescopic vision. I am doing this to represent that Elves can see farther than a normal person. This alone should account for elves being better archers' date=' as they will be to shoot at range a bit better than most races do.[/quote']

 

That helps them to see, but not to connect with arrows. Maybe give them a PSL or two versus Range as well? Of course, if I want a human to be equivalent, I can just buy him PSL's as well. Campaign ground rules could, of course, cap the PSL's one can buy, with the elves' "bonus levels" not counting to the maximum.

[UltraRob]

Re: Ncm:15

 

That helps them to see' date=' but not to connect with arrows. Maybe give them a PSL or two versus Range as well? Of course, if I want a human to be equivalent, I can just buy him PSL's as well. Campaign ground rules could, of course, cap the PSL's one can buy, with the elves' "bonus levels" not counting to the maximum.[/quote']

 

That assumes, of course, that you want to make it so that Elves willl almost always be better and no human could match them...I think it's perfectly reasonable that they have the same max (if any), but Elves just get a natural head start. So while I'd give the Elf maybe +2 ranged PSLs as part of their package, it doesn't mean that humans couldn't buy them to match.

 

Rob

[UltraRob]

Re: Ncm:15

 

I'd expect lowering NCM to decrease variety: DEX is good for most people, as is SPD, so I'd expect characteristics to cluster around 13 for most things and people to max out on the same things. Players who might like an 18 PRE will probably balk at 11 points for it - They'd be better off going for 13 and a PRE skill level.

 

My experience is the same as it ever was - if players are clustering up at the top end of NCM, that's a sign you are starting them off on too many points.

 

cheers, Mark

 

 

Valid points, but I'm not sure I agree with the "too many points" thing...for example if I gave my PC's 50+50 characters, 50 less than the "standard" for heroic fantasy characters I have 0 doubts the first 40 points will be spent to write in STR:20, DEX:20 on at least two or three of those character sheets because they know the value they get for those numbers. If I didn't NCM them, at least one person would try STR:25, DEX:30 for 75pts and then baseline everything else and use the remaining 25 points to buy skills. And, for those who say "combat monster!", the ironic part is that person would use those 25 skill points to buy: Oratory, Persuasion, PS:Cooking, Survival and a host of noncom skills at 8< or 11< for 1-2pts each.

They're not stupid, once they make themselves king of the combat hill, they immediately start working on noncombat stuff so I can't nail them for it. Sure, they won't rule at noncombat things, but they will make sure they have enough to get by. I have a clever bunch of powergamers, I do.

I guess maybe I should just start them with 25+25...but that just seems cruel...

 

Rob

[Old Man]

Re: Ncm:15

 

Some of my better games have been at the 25+25 level. "Look out! It's a goblin! He's so fast! He's so strong!"

[Drakkenkin]

Re: Ncm:15

 

That assumes, of course, that you want to make it so that Elves will almost always be better and no human could match them...

Rob

 

Well, it would only effect the Elves ability to hit an object at a longer rang. Not THAT over powering or awe inspiring, but a nice perk.

 

Anyway, I don't follow the line of thinking of all races being equal in their capabilities. It's a nice warm and fuzzy idea, but humans can't even perform all tasks equally. (Heck, I can't swim worth a jack, and I live by the sea, but their are many people I know who can swim just fine.) Why would other races be equal in how well they could do tasks with other races?

 

I like carry the feeling that some races are better at some tasks more then other races throughout out the lives of the PC, not just as a thought for character creation and the first set of games. After which everyone morphs into the same thing. (They my look different on the out side (races), but they are the same on the inside (abilities.)

 

I'd give the Elf maybe +2 ranged PSLs as part of their package' date=' it doesn't mean that humans couldn't buy them to match.[/quote']

 

This is a good point, that a human should be able to raise there skill. Nevertheless I think that a highly skilled elf would be more skilled with a bow then a highly skilled human with a bow. Along the same line of thought, I would never want to rely on a squad of cave-dwelling Dwarfs for archery support. I would imagine they would have a tendency to be a bit near-sited.

 

Making a NCM for PSL would work, for me, to give the feel to a world I would like, but what would be a good level?

 

Drakkenkin

 

EDIT: I just reread this post. Seems like some one could take this to be stronger then it was meant. Sorry if it ruffles any feathers.

 

I was thinking that the explanation for the +2 ranged PSLs would be a physical quality of the elf (better eyes for seeing further.) No one would argue that a human will never be able to natuiraly see as well as an eagle, and I would never say that a gnome could naturaly be as strong as a strong dwarf. It’s just not in there physical makeup.

[Drakkenkin]

Re: Ncm:15

 

Some of my better games have been at the 25+25 level. "Look out! It's a goblin! He's so fast! He's so strong!"

 

I have to agree. It's not a easy life, but I find it more fun, and you can see noticable growth to the charicters earlyer on in the game.

 

Drakkenkin

[Lezentauw]

Re: Ncm:15

 

I am not so sure that I like putting skills of any kind into a racial package. To me skills usually belong in a social package, which is what I am using for everyman skills.

 

My take on what makes Elves so good with a bow is that they can spend 50 some years training how to use one. In my campaign, to represent this I am only allowing Elves to have developed martial skills with a bow. This is what I am using to represent the amount of training that they have done over the years. I am using the Kyujutsu style from the UMA to represent this style.

 

If an Elf was raised in a human society, I don't see that Elf being as good with a bow, than an Elf trained by an Elven Bowmaster. Just how I see things

[Old Man]

Re: Ncm:15

 

I have to agree. It's not a easy life' date=' but I find it more fun, and you can see noticable growth to the charicters earlyer on in the game.[/quote']

 

Yes. Plus it avoids the whole NCM breakpoint issue almost completely, since no one can afford to boost more than one stat to max. DEX 20 takes 60% of your points right there.

[Drakkenkin]

Re: Ncm:15

 

If an Elf was raised in a human society' date=' I don't see that Elf being as good with a bow, than an Elf trained by an Elven Bowmaster. Just how I see things[/quote']

 

I can see it your way too. I think I may divide the race packages into two parts. First, one for the physical characteristics that all member of that race have because of their DNA (how I would define good sight/depth perception giving elves a +2 on range modifications), and second, one for cultural training that would be given an average member of that race (how someone might define the bow martial art form as Lezentauw suggest.)

 

Drakkenkin

[dbsousa]

Re: Ncm:15

 

In a recent Star Hero Game, I tried to increase the variety in Stats by declaring that no two game characters could have all identical Primary Stats. It seemed to do the trick...

So, did your players barter over who would have what stats?

 

That sounds like an interesting idea! I might try it!

 

Rob

They didn't have to. Once they knew that I wasnt going to let two characters have STR 18, DEX 20, CON 13, BODY 13 etc., I got a good range of stats.

 

I think also that making it a 75 base point game with 75 points of Disads, and giving the characters access to Alien Abilities and Mystic Powers, made them concentrate less on stats, and more on how to build the Jedi Mind Trick, or the radially symmetrical alien...

[Briguy123]

Re: Ncm:15

 

I've done to 3 things to alleviate the problem of everyone having the same stats.

 

I raised the cost of strength to 2 points per. When it only cost one point it was too efficient to buy strength up to 18 just for the benefit to figured characteristics.

 

I set starting points at 75/50 and stated that no more than 65 points could be spent on characteristics. With only 65 points to spend, having a 20 St., 20 Dx. and 4 Spd. Leaves only 5 points left over to spend on constitution, PD and ED. This leaves the character vulnerable to being Con. stunned on a regular basis - a bad thing for a front line fighter. Magic using characters also have to spend points to increase their Int. and Ego which further limits the 20 Str.-20 Dex.-4 Spd. phenomenon.

 

I got rid of the comliness stat (if you want to be pretty, you buy it as a perk) and replaced it with a new stat called perception, which costs one point per. I never liked the idea that someone with exceptional intelligence also had an increased awareness of his or her physical environment. How do you model the absent minded genius who woould lose his own head if it weren't attached? Many players find it helpful to spend at least three points in perception (increasing perception rolls to 12<) , because ambushers making called shots to the head and vitals can end a fight before it starts if they catch characters by suprise.

 

 

With the limited points availabe for stats, players have to be concerned about how they want to focus their character. So far this has worked for my campaigns YMMV. Unfortunately, I still haven't solved the problem of every stat being 8, 10, 13, 15, 18 or 20. @!#$ min-maxers!

[John Desmarais]

Re: Ncm:15

 

With the limited points availabe for stats' date=' players have to be concerned about how they want to focus their character. So far this has worked for my campaigns YMMV. Unfortunately, I still haven't solved the problem of every stat being 8, 10, 13, 15, 18 or 20. @!#$ min-maxers! [/quote']

 

How to deal with the 8,10,13,15,18,20 thing. Show the players some advantage to having stats that don't hit the "sweet spots". Since DEX tends to be the biggest offender, start giving the villains DEX scores that are one point above the sweetspot, so that they always get to go before the PCs.

 

John D.

[Old Man]

Re: Ncm:15

 

STR breakpoints you can fix by tweaking the STR Mins on popular weapons. If the STR Min for a longsword is 11, then STR values of 11, 16, and 21 are suddenly worth something to the swordsmen. BODY tends not to have severe breakpoint issues. CON, I don't know.

[UltraRob]

Re: Ncm:15

 

I've done to 3 things to alleviate the problem of everyone having the same stats.

 

I raised the cost of strength to 2 points per. When it only cost one point it was too efficient to buy strength up to 18 just for the benefit to figured characteristics.

 

I set starting points at 75/50 and stated that no more than 65 points could be spent on characteristics. With only 65 points to spend, having a 20 St., 20 Dx. and 4 Spd. Leaves only 5 points left over to spend on constitution, PD and ED. This leaves the character vulnerable to being Con. stunned on a regular basis - a bad thing for a front line fighter. Magic using characters also have to spend points to increase their Int. and Ego which further limits the 20 Str.-20 Dex.-4 Spd. phenomenon.

 

Actually a nice variant of that for Fantasy Hero games would be that while no more than 65pts can be spent on stats, the racial stat bonuses you get don't count towards that total. That way there is that advantage or ability for other races to outstrip humans in some areas.

 

Do you use NCM in your game as well?

 

Rob

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Ncm:15

 

STR breakpoints you can fix by tweaking the STR Mins on popular weapons. If the STR Min for a longsword is 11' date=' then STR values of 11, 16, and 21 are suddenly worth something to the swordsmen. BODY tends not to have severe breakpoint issues. CON, I don't know.[/quote']

 

Con? Just change the formuli for figured to something like this [from 1 to 10]:

 

1 1 STUN, 3 END

2 1 REC

3 1 STUN, 3 END

4 1 ED, 1 END

5 1 STUN, 3 END

6 1 STUN, 3 END

7 1 REC

8 1 STUN, 3 END

9 1 ED, 1 END

10 1 STUN, 3 END

 

Suddenly, moving from 12 to 13 CON rants 2.5 points in Figured, rather than +2 END, +1 STUN, +1 REC and +1 ED for 5 points in Figured.

 

You could swap out a +1 STUN +3 END for 1/2 and give +2 END with the ED, but I like the idea of the ED point (since most players really value defenses) being the only CON point that doesn't grant at least its cost in figured char's.

 

[And I'm more and more a fan of the idea of reducing the costs of REC, Stun and END so that +5 con is not more than offset by the figured's]

[Old Man]

Re: Ncm:15

 

It's a good idea, but it seems really kludgy. I know you'd only ever have to do it when spending points on CON, but still.