What should be DROPPED from HERO?

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Sure' date=' you can get rid of Power Defense...just as soon as you get rid of Drain, Dispell, Transfer, Aid, etc, etc, etc. If the system is going to have Adjustment Powers, it [b']must[/b] have Adjustment Defense... AKA "Power Defense".

 

Speaking of Adjustment Powers, I have to speak in defense of Transfer. Sure, it does the same basic thing that a construct of Drain and Aid would do. However, it does it far more elegantly and quickly. The concepts it is used to construct are common enough that it would harm the game to get rid of it and instead require a cludgy compound power -- with Transfer, you roll ONE set of effect dice, as opposed to two with Drain+Aid, and the amount you gain is directly tied to the amount you managed to take.

The concept is to have specific defenses and to have the Adjustment Powers go against existing defense types and if they don't, then they are basically NNDs or AVLDs or such, to be fair.

[lemming]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

You're mean to a couple of your fellow players!

[simplygnome]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

I dont like the INT based PER either, so I use the 11-.

 

PER has nothing to do with INT. I consider myself to be a decently smart fellow. On the other hand, I couldn't spot a 300 pound boa-constrictor if it was eating my girlfriend while we were both in bed together....Really, I'm THAT blind when it comes to noticing my surroundings.

 

I dont see the connection and I don't see the harm in allowing ONE roll to be free based. First it bothered me, but I don't see an attribute that I would align it with.

 

My other thought was to incorporate a PER stat at a 1cp for 2pts, and just make PER go off of that. If you wanted to add disads, or go above NCM, you would still use the PSL at 3pts a level, but you'd have a tangible base to go off of.

 

*Shrug...Im just using the 11- at the moment. Its working well for me.

 

To each his own. Take care Hero players...AND a Merry Christmas Eve at that!

 

 

EDIT: Random pointless side note - I give elves +2 Per rolls in their Racial Packet, and Shifters [a mutated Eberron convert] get +1 PER to their roll.

[Dust Raven]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Concerning PER & INT:

 

I'm seeing a lot of people here who don't see a connection between perception and intelligence. I'd just like to toss this log on the fire. PER doesn't necessarily mean "perception" and INT doesn't necessarily mean "intelligence." What I mean is that when this game was being designed, they needed a name for a Characteristic that simulated a character's ability to collect, process and utlize information, and decided to call it INT or Intelligence. By definition INT directly relates to a character's ability to notice and recognize important things, which is an ability they called PER or Perception. The funny thing is, as a stat INT really has nothing to do with how smart you are. Smart is just one of many SFX for a high INT, and a high INT is just one of many possible mechanics to simulate the SFX of being smart.

 

If you want a brilliant, though absent, mind, give the character skills. Want him to be good at those skills but not perceptive? Give him Skill Levels, not INT. You can still call him smart, intelligent, brilliant or whatever, but not call him perceptive.

 

Or you can just give him a Physical Limitation: Unobservant

[Dust Raven]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Concerning Transfer:

 

I used to like this Power, but the more I put it to use, the more I liked Linking Aid to Drain. Sure it's not as elegant, but neither is using Healing to simulate Regeneration. It works though, and doesn't need a whole new Power to make it work better or make it more balanced. Transfer can go.

[Kristopher]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Concerning Transfer:

 

I used to like this Power, but the more I put it to use, the more I liked Linking Aid to Drain. Sure it's not as elegant, but neither is using Healing to simulate Regeneration. It works though, and doesn't need a whole new Power to make it work better or make it more balanced. Transfer can go.

 

I still have mixed feelings about making a massive construct out of what used to be a simple power (Regeneration), so that's not an arguement I find persuasive.

 

We agree that it's not elegant.

 

So that still leaves my other three concerns regarding Drain+Aid unaddressed.

1) It requires rolling two sets of dice, instead of one. I love HERO, but we're already rolling more than enough dice.

2) It doesn't link what the user gains with what he takes from the victim the way that Transfer does.

3) It requires more space on the character sheet for a more complicated construct that doesn't instantly tell you what it does.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

I'm sure this has been said' date=' but I would comment in any case that lots of highly intelligent people seem oblivious to their surroundings.[/quote']

 

Take a limitation on INT - "Oblivious to surroundings" - Intelligence does not contribute to PER rolls. Consider PER a figured characteristics and call it -1/2.

 

Or take a disadvantage "Doesn't pay attention": -3 (or whatever) to PER rolls. Frequent, mild (or siginificat depending on penalty) for 10 or 15.

 

I'd rather leave the characteristics as is and limit them when some facet is lacking than break them into their component parts and have 50+ Characteristics (including a dozen that used to be Comeliness ) or deny tyhe fact that some characteristics lend a natural aptitude to some tasks.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

So that still leaves my other three concerns regarding Drain+Aid unaddressed.

1) It requires rolling two sets of dice, instead of one. I love HERO, but we're already rolling more than enough dice.

 

Dice rolls are equal (-0)

 

2) It doesn't link what the user gains with what he takes from the victim the way that Transfer does.

 

Aid limited to amount drained from target (-1/2, between power defense and possibility of missing)

 

3) It requires more space on the character sheet for a more complicated construct that doesn't instantly tell you what it does.

 

This is purely subjective so can't be debated objectively. The game will never have perfect descriptors. For me, naming the power "Strength Transfer" would be quite sufficient. Give a gamer unfamiliar with Hero a character sheet with power names, and one without. I bet you he'll think Concussion Blast is defended by PD, but Energy Blast is defended by ED.

 

Let's look at some problems caused by keeping transfer separate. To begin, the replacement consruct should be:

 

1d6 Drain. 1/2 END (+1/4), Linked to Aid (-1/4) PLUS

1d6 Aid, costs END (-1/2), Linked to Drain (-1/4), same roll as Drain (-0), Aid cannot exceed points drained from target (-1/2), Self only (-1/2)

 

Now, let's compare

 

Cost: 10 points for Drain + 3.64 for Aid = 13.64 per die

 

END: 1.5 per die, just like Transfer

 

Both used together (can't fire one and not the other), just like Transfer

 

One roll, and only the points drained add to the Aid, just like Transfer

 

If Aid is maxed, the power still drains - why doesn't Transfer, when it costs more?

 

No need for huge FAQ (or 5er entry) to discuss cost of enhancing Drain, Aid or both (which rules presently overprice this for transfer by requring a doubled advantage on all the points paid).

 

That last is likely a bit confusing. As an example, say you want your Transfer to choose any one characteristic for both the drain and aid effect. The FAQ previously indicated that required buying the +1/4 advantage twice. Reasonable?

 

(a) Sure - the power gains two advantages, one on the loss to target and one on the gain to user.

 

( No - the advantage cost applies to both the "drain" and "aid" portion of the power, so the advantage should affect both components.

 

I buy in to (. If we apply "any one characteristic" to Aid and Drain, above, we get a 12 per die Drain and a 4.55 per die aid, for 16.55 per "transfer" die. If we apply it (per FAQ) to Transfer, we get 22.5 points per die (using +1/4 we get 18.75).

 

Mechanically, I'd be just as happy to keep Transfer at 15 per die, but treat it like a Linked Drain (10 points) and Aid (cost reduced to 5 points). This would solve the mechanical defects discussed baove - you want an advantage on only one facet of the power, you pay for it on tghe 5 or 10 point per die components.

 

But the fact is that, if Champions had included Aid from its first edition, we would never have needed Transfer. It's only there because it's always been there.

[Rapier]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

If you want a brilliant, though absent, mind, give the character skills. Want him to be good at those skills but not perceptive? Give him Skill Levels, not INT. You can still call him smart, intelligent, brilliant or whatever, but not call him perceptive.

 

Or you can just give him a Physical Limitation: Unobservant

Since FREd came out with it's "Characters who are always big don't have Growth they have Disads" thing, I've made a fundamental change in the way I've been building disads. While it was always possible to give a BBB character a "gimpy leg" disad, it was just never done often or satisfyingly...to my mind.

 

Since FREd came out and kind of codified the concept, I use it all over. I've got:

 

PhysLim: Gimpy Leg (-3 to Agility based DEX Rolls - Acrobatics, Breakfall, DCV etc)

PhysLim: Unobservant (-2, -3 or -4 to PER depending on severity)

 

Suddenly I've got characters all over the place with disads that are penalising skill rolls, characteristic rolls and combat values.

[Rapier]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Dice rolls are equal (-0)

I'd be REEEEAL leery of allowing a limitation like that. Standard effect I can understand because it is the statistical average. With 100 rolls of a 15d6 EB there would be no difference in the average of the 100 x 15d6 rolls and the 100 x Standard Effect. That's a time saver...and one that pretty much NPCs are the only ones to use. The only time I have players with a Standard Effect is when they want to get a consistant static effect (and thats not often).

 

If Dice Rolls are Equal is -0, what about Dice Rolls are Maxxed, Dice Rolls are Minned? 'Tis a slippery slope, my friend. That's one precipice I'm more than happy to be well back from.

 

At the most, I would allow a -1/2 Cannot Aid more than the amount Drained.

[Kristopher]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Isn't Standard Effect 3 ?

 

That would make the average on 15d6 with standard effect 45 STUN,

whereas the average on a normal 15d6 is 52.5 STUN.

 

(The average on 1d6 is 3.5, not 3)

[Rapier]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

1d6 Drain. 1/2 END (+1/4), Linked to Aid (-1/4) PLUS

1d6 Aid, costs END (-1/2), Linked to Drain (-1/4), same roll as Drain (-0), Aid cannot exceed points drained from target (-1/2), Self only (-1/2)

Not to pick nits, but I'm going to pick some nits.

 

The double link (Drain linked to Aid, and Aid linked to Drain) is kludgy. I know its all legal and shit, but I've never been fond of that kind of construct. Logically, in this case the Drain should occur first, so should get no Linked lim. Perhaps a Trigger on the Aid would be better. At least, in my mind, a Trigger is a more naturally concepted construct.

 

I've already commented on how much I dislike Same Roll as Drain, so not gonna repeat that. However, if the Aid roll equals the Drain roll, then it is impossible for the Aid to exceed the points drained from the target. Therefore, that -1/2 limitation does not actual limit and is not worth any points.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

I'd be REEEEAL leery of allowing a limitation like that.

 

Call it a +0 advantage then.

 

If Dice Rolls are Equal is -0' date=' what about Dice Rolls are Maxxed, Dice Rolls are Minned?[/quote']

 

How can you possibly consider "Make one roll and that's the effect for both powers" comparable to "Max rolls" and "Min rolls"? You can't get a high roll on one and a low roll on the other. It's great when you roll good and lousy when you roll poorly - pretty much equal.

 

"All rolls are minimum"? Buy 1/3 as many dice and make them standard effect. Cost is 1/3. Limit should therefore be -2, if one were needed, but it's not - just buy less dice and standard effect.

 

"All rolls are maximum"? Buy twice as many dice, standard effect. I suppose that implies a +1 advantage, but I would make the character just buy twice as many dice at standard effect.

 

At the most' date=' I would allow a -1/2 Cannot Aid more than the amount Drained.[/quote']

 

Which saves more points, and limits the power further. Fine, and I would agree to such a limitation if that's the effect desired. However, this does not duplicate the effects of the present Transfer power, and thus does not serve the purpose. Simply saying "only roll the dice once; you get that for both powers' effect" works for me.

[Agent X]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Transfer is fine. Old School Regeneration was sublime. This philosophy crap to rules construction in HERO can only lead to doom for the system if the powers-that-be got wrapped up completely in it.

 

Playability is the most important value in any game and that includes HERO. Transfer is easier. Old-School Regeneration is easier. Old-School Instant Change is easier.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Playability is the most important value in any game and that includes HERO. Transfer is easier. Old-School Regeneration is easier. Old-School Instant Change is easier.

 

I'd have to agree with this.

[OddHat]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Transfer is fine. Old School Regeneration was sublime. This philosophy crap to rules construction in HERO can only lead to doom for the system if the powers-that-be got wrapped up completely in it.

 

Playability is the most important value in any game and that includes HERO. Transfer is easier. Old-School Regeneration is easier. Old-School Instant Change is easier.

 

You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

 

Well said.

[Kristopher]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Transfer is fine. Old School Regeneration was sublime. This philosophy crap to rules construction in HERO can only lead to doom for the system if the powers-that-be got wrapped up completely in it.

 

Playability is the most important value in any game and that includes HERO. Transfer is easier. Old-School Regeneration is easier. Old-School Instant Change is easier.

 

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Take a limitation on INT - "Oblivious to surroundings" - Intelligence does not contribute to PER rolls. Consider PER a figured characteristics and call it -1/2.

 

Or take a disadvantage "Doesn't pay attention": -3 (or whatever) to PER rolls. Frequent, mild (or siginificat depending on penalty) for 10 or 15.

 

I'd rather leave the characteristics as is and limit them when some facet is lacking than break them into their component parts and have 50+ Characteristics (including a dozen that used to be Comeliness ) or deny tyhe fact that some characteristics lend a natural aptitude to some tasks.

FYI, I stated in another post "And certainly one can buy INT that does not affect PER. ". I acknowledge the strength of that argument, I just would say that there's a "questionably viable" (or better said I suppose controversial) alternative of spiltting the two altogether.

 

I think it's a matter of degrees. I could just as easily see putting together CON and BOD, then create "Ability to Live Against Damage" (Hit Points) as a derived char from (new CON/BOD stat)/2 + EGO/2 or such, if we talk about ways to model basic abilities and such. It's all a question of what degree we can elegantly combine things that seem to go hand-in-hand in heroic fiction and to what degree we need to keep them separate.

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Transfer is fine. Old School Regeneration was sublime. This philosophy crap to rules construction in HERO can only lead to doom for the system if the powers-that-be got wrapped up completely in it.

 

Playability is the most important value in any game and that includes HERO. Transfer is easier. Old-School Regeneration is easier. Old-School Instant Change is easier.

I don't think it's at all accurate to say "this philosophy crap..." when playability is also a part of a coherent gaming philosophy. And I happen to agree with you in regard to BOTH Transfer and Regen while being one of the strongest advocates of making HERO fully coherent and streamlined. So the "crap" comment is a cheap shot, my friend.

[Agent X]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

I don't think it's at all accurate to say "this philosophy crap..." when playability is also a part of a coherent gaming philosophy. And I happen to agree with you in regard to BOTH Transfer and Regen while being one of the strongest advocates of making HERO fully coherent and streamlined. So the "crap" comment is a cheap shot' date=' my friend.[/quote'] Cheap shot? Please don't take the word crap so seriously.

 

Coherent Gaming Philosophy is only a part of playability insofar as you don't make your game so incoherent that folks can't understand the rules. The funny thing is that some of the suggestions I see in Hero System Discussion to make the game be more coherent by "reducing it to its basic functions" would ultimately make a character sheet unintelligible to read, and thus incoherent.

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Cheap shot? Please don't take the word crap so seriously.

 

Coherent Gaming Philosophy is only a part of playability insofar as you don't make your game so incoherent that folks can't understand the rules. The funny thing is that some of the suggestions I see in Hero System Discussion to make the game be more coherent by "reducing it to its basic functions" would ultimately make a character sheet unintelligible to read, and thus incoherent.

And please don't take "cheap shot" so seriously.

 

PS - and my whole point was what you just said, whether we agree on the specifics of how much HERO should or should not be reduced to basic functions. As you might have noted, in that other discussion regarding creating a core toolkit system that is the basis of HERO, I don't think anyone defended that as an actual gaming system to be played.

[Agent X]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

And please don't take "cheap shot" so seriously.

Cool. I was more worried you were.

 

PS - and my whole point was what you just said' date=' whether we agree on the specifics of how much HERO should or should not be reduced to basic functions. As you might have noted, in that other discussion regarding creating a core toolkit system that is the basis of HERO, I don't think [b']anyone[/b] defended that as an actual gaming system to be played.

Okidokes - I'm more worried about the arbitrary decision about what is consistent "enough." That's where we get Steve Long's overcomplication of Damage Shield, Instant Change, and Regeneration.

[zornwil]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Cool. I was more worried you were.

 

Okidokes - I'm more worried about the arbitrary decision about what is consistent "enough." That's where we get Steve Long's overcomplication of Damage Shield, Instant Change, and Regeneration.

Yeah, here's the interesting thing, to restate as I think it is just that interesting, even though I consider myself a hardcore advocate of consistency and reduction, I think Regen sucks as it is now (in fact actually even from a design perspective I think it's a step back, as stated above), Instant Change coulda/shoulda been kept as a Talent at least, and Damage Shield was fine as it stood as commonly interpreted (when I reread 4th based on another thread it seems quite possible that in fact the common interpretation isn't what the text meant).

 

Playability is important. That and one thing you bring up by this is that "streamlining" should indeed mean that, it shouldn't mean making something like Regen MORE difficult to build and put on a character sheet.

 

One thing I would do is that even if a Power is built on another Power (let's say that's somehow doable with Regen built on Aid, for the sake of argument), if the Power is reasonably common (Regen definitely is), it sure ought to have a write-up of some sort in the book that allows you to just put on your character sheet simply that power and its dice of effect - NOT the base power and all sorts of Limitations and Advantages (let alone the misguided Regen build which even forces hand-waving and new interpretation of using the time chart!)

[Dust Raven]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

Playability is the most important value in any game and that includes HERO. Transfer is easier. Old-School Regeneration is easier. Old-School Instant Change is easier.

I agree to what you've got in bold, but not necessarily the rest. Personally, I find nothing "difficult" about 5E's method for Regen or Instant Change. If anything, it makes those abilities more flexible, and allows you to simulate the effects with a variety of other Powers (Shape Shift could just as easily be use for Instant Change, and allows for a different mechanic and result for the same effect for example).

 

I would also disagree that "easy" equals "playability". The original D&D was easy... that didn't make it playable.

[Agent X]

Re: What should be DROPPED from HERO?

 

I agree to what you've got in bold, but not necessarily the rest. Personally, I find nothing "difficult" about 5E's method for Regen or Instant Change. If anything, it makes those abilities more flexible, and allows you to simulate the effects with a variety of other Powers (Shape Shift could just as easily be use for Instant Change, and allows for a different mechanic and result for the same effect for example).

 

I would also disagree that "easy" equals "playability". The original D&D was easy... that didn't make it playable.

Fine. All other things being equal, easier is better.

 

What opportunities did I lose out on concerning instant change and regeneration in 4th ed. that I have now? (If you bring up the regeneration adders, those are cool but you didn't have to do anything but add them to the 4th ed. description.)