Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

(you know, i will say the quality here is much more stable/predictably good than in the States and I do daresay even in London from the only time I've been there before)

 

It's all to do with the water anyway. Despite not being a drinker I have a long background in the alcohol retail business (family pubs!) and an interest in biotechnology led to several visits to breweries etc.

 

I've found, through this time that the beers originally brewed in particular areas are always 'better' 'more stable' etc in that area than anywhere else. It essentially comes down to the fact that the brew was tailored to the local water supply and its particular chemistry. It's difficult to replicate those undefinable traces in water elsewhere.

 

So, even here in the UK people are convinced that Dublin Guinness is better.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

OK. I think I promised this yesterday but it took a long time to convince myself to stop trying to explain everything. This is a summary of costs that are in the core idea. It would be fantastic if some people could use them to convert one or two of their own characters to see how it works out point wise.

 

 

FRAMEWORK POWER: Costs

Reserve 1pt per point

 

Slots 2pts per slot

 

Power Effects

 

Defined

Static (Active Points/10)/(1+limitations)

Fluid (Active Points/5)/(1+limitations)

Undefined

Fundemental

Static (Active Points/5)/(1+limitations)

Fluid (Active Points/3)/(1+limitations)

Universal

Static (Active Points/3)/(1+limitations)

Fluid (Active Points/2)/(1+limitations)

 

Definitions

 

Reserve: the pool of points from which slots draw when they are active.

Slots: where the power effects reside.

Defined power effect: power, advantages and limitations all defined and fixed. Only one power is active in the slot.

Undefined power effect: these slots are bought as an active point limit and may contain several active powers at any one time.

Fundamental power effect: powers, advantages and limitations within a tightly described power effect such as flame projection and plasma guns

Universal power effect: powers, advantages and limitations restricted only within the broad scope of the framework power and slot definition, such as gravity tricks and flame manipulation.

Static: when active the slot draws the active points of the slot from the reserve whether or not the powers are used at full power.

Fluid: when active the slot draws only the active points actually being used from the reserve.

 

Possible changes

 

Making the reserve more expensive, perhaps charging 5 points for four points in the reserve or 3 points for two points in the reserve. This would be an easy way of restricting the number of powers active in the framework power at any one time and/or increasing the cost of powers bought through the framework.

 

Limiting the number of powers that can be active within an undefined slot at any one time. It would be possible to put limitations/advantages to limit/increase the number of powers. Zornwil suggested a system earlier on. This would increase complexity but would also better define the differences between fundamental and universal slots.

 

Change the name of fundamental slots. They aren't really fundamental and I wanted to avoid using elemental, perhaps partial or flexible would be better names.

 

Introduce a way of having always on powers in the framework, for example armour from power armour that would be limited if someone was to disrupt the power armour. These would be a better type of fundamental slot.

[zornwil]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

Thanks on both counts (interesting info on the water in terms of your research, I've heard water proposed as that big a differentiator but not from anyone knowing what they're talking about).

 

Will spend more time on the framework upon return of course.

[schir1964]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

Arise!!

 

- Christopher Mullins

[handleyj]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

I guess no one else likes this idea? If ever there was a 6th Ed of Hero (and it was a massive overhaul of the system), then I'd like to see something like this implemented. I think the three different Power Frameworks is a hurdle for new comers to the game.

 

I'm not sure if Doc Democracy or zornwil are still active on the forums much, but it looks like things are pretty much hammered out, but there is still a feeling of leaving things hanging from zornwil's last post. If you guys are still around... have you ever used this framework in a game?

[zornwil]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

No, I've intended to at least do a more thorough study via examples, including at least trying it as an intellectual exercise (as opposed to requiring it in play just yet) on the PCs, but keep getting busy with other things. And more recently, really swamped with work. Thanks for expressing the interest - definitely advise if you do anything with this idea.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

Like Zornwil, too busy with other things.

 

Please feel free to use/abuse as you wish. There is defeinitely work needed on it - I keep looking at my notes but haven't yet felt the urge to work on it beyond other things.

 

I think that there needs to be an overarching structure to the whole framework thing - its kind of arbitrary just now as it tries to model comic book feel with underlying structure. Not sure that works as well as it might - though its done OK for years.

 

My use of Hero is firmly in the heroic/fantasy/pulp realms now. frameworks tend to be more prevalent in superheroes and so of less immediate interest.

 

Doc

[zornwil]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

Hi Doc - good to see you...as we pass like ships in the night!

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

Hi Doc - good to see you...as we pass like ships in the night!

 

You're not as prolific as you were at one point, there is less opportunity for us to cross at the same time!

 

You got real life stuff to do now?

 

 

Doc

[Vondy]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

I'm not against a unified framework in concept. I just think new mechanics should address an existing problem, or actually work better than existing mechanics. If its notably better than a change might be in order. This might be better, but without seeing several more examples and having a chance to test it my comments are limited. Also, I'm not tracking well today, so I need clarification on two things:

1. Am I correct that you purchase 1) the pool, 2) the number of potential powers that can be run at a given time, and 3) the individual powers?
   
2. Why are limitations marked with "+" and running up to 9. I'm confused by it because 1) its not standard hero notation, and 2) I've seldom seen any advantage or limitation that ran that high. Are they really adders?

With those questions asked I have one comment, which has been stated by others:

1. The costing needs to be considered very carefully - right now its undercosted (IMO)*.

Of course, I don't really understand the notation being used, so I could be totally wrong...

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

Without seeing several more examples and having a chance to test it my comments are limited. [/Quote]

 

That is the problem - it is severely lacking playtesting. Neither Zornwil or I have been able to devote the necessary time, so all costs etc are provisional on that and suggested by relating the costs to multipowers and ECs.

 

 

1. Am I correct that you purchase 1) the pool, 2) the number of potential powers that can be run at a given time, and 3) the individual powers?

 

I'm presuming that you are looking at the post at the top of page one - that was changed in post 52 of that thread that brought it to the state as posted by Christopher in his thread.

 

Anyway. 1) You purchase the pool, 2) you purchase slots into which you can place power effects (one slot would not be limited to a single power depending on the type of slot you bought), 3) you purchase the active point limit for a slot (which might be one power, a tight group of powers or a broad group of powers).

 

What we wanted to do was, in effect construct a framewrok power where you might have different ways of exploiting a particular SFX without having to break it up into seperate frameworks to keep it point competitive.

 

• Why are limitations marked with "+" and running up to 9. I'm confused by it because 1) its not standard hero notation, and 2) I've seldom seen any advantage or limitation that ran that high. Are they really adders?

 

Well - I moved away from that 9 and I was using very old Hero notation where limitations were + and advantages were x - 2nd edition I think. It has stayed in my head. I hope that the notation used in post 52 is clearer.

 

With those questions asked I have one comment, which has been stated by others:

 

1. The costing needs to be considered very carefully - right now its undercosted (IMO)*.

Of course, I don't really understand the notation being used, so I could be totally wrong...

 

I think we eventually made things more costly but we do still need that to be tested for play purposes

 

 

Doc

[Vondy]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

 

Anyway. 1) You purchase the pool, 2) you purchase slots into which you can place power effects (one slot would not be limited to a single power depending on the type of slot you bought), 3) you purchase the active point limit for a slot (which might be one power, a tight group of powers or a broad group of powers).

 

Based on your explanation and post 52 I have it clear in my head now. I think, on a structural level, you've succeeded. It would have to survive play-testing, but I think its workable (and does streamline the system).

 

 

Well - I moved away from that 9 and I was using very old Hero notation where limitations were + and advantages were x - 2nd edition I think. It has stayed in my head. I hope that the notation used in post 52 is clearer.

 

Yes, clearer. Thank you.

[zornwil]

Re: Universal Framework Proposition [LONG]

 

You're not as prolific as you were at one point, there is less opportunity for us to cross at the same time!

 

You got real life stuff to do now?

 

 

Doc

Yeah (pardon the OT, will keep it brief), my role at work has changed, basically from a project/"business solutions" management in IT (basically managing portfolio of efforts for a few business segments) to systems architecture (I"m a "Senior Enterprise Architect" or some similar title), and I'm doing really interesting stuff but extremely time-consuming at the moment. The work is good enough I don't especially mind the lack of free time (whereas last year I really was only rarely busy and had gotten quite bored at my job, breeding annoyance). So good stuff. Between my wife's business (calligraphy, she just started doing it full-time self-employed professionally a year ago and so she's still building it) and all my work we had to put off the trip over there another year. I hope the S.O., child, and house and whatever comes with that are all good (you're still working for Parliament, too, right?).