Idle Scalability Notion

[zornwil]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

That was a very insightful comment. Are you trying to get repped or something?

He keeps saying rep-worthy things, he won't shut up!

 

I had to rep him finally, sorry to pick at those red dots but between RDU Neil's exhortations and CourtFool's own regular good posts, it had to happen!

[Trebuchet]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

He keeps saying rep-worthy things, he won't shut up!

 

I had to rep him finally, sorry to pick at those red dots but between RDU Neil's exhortations and CourtFool's own regular good posts, it had to happen!

I finally repped him too. Enough is enough!

 

He only got what he deserved.

[zornwil]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I finally repped him too. Enough is enough!

 

He only got what he deserved.

That'll teach him about being so insightful!

[Dust Raven]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

He keeps saying rep-worthy things, he won't shut up!

 

I had to rep him finally, sorry to pick at those red dots but between RDU Neil's exhortations and CourtFool's own regular good posts, it had to happen!

 

Costantly. Maybe he has a new favorite color?

 

Did you notice he only has three bright red tiles now instead of 5? He had four yesterday... I'm sure your rep had nothing to do that that sudden change, zornwil .

[zornwil]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

Costantly. Maybe he has a new favorite color?

 

Did you notice he only has three bright red tiles now instead of 5? He had four yesterday... I'm sure your rep had nothing to do that that sudden change, zornwil .

I can't imagine I had anything to do with it!

[CourtFool]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

Damn you all! I will have to have Ben set it back.

[zornwil]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

Damn you all! I will have to have Ben set it back.

Aw. come on, take it like a llama!

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

Although HERO scales better at higher levels than most games' date=' it still can be a bit hard to handle, particularly because XP are generally awarded in a lineaer fashion but character growth, if invested into any power or characteristic, is really exponential.[/quote']

I don't see how it's exponential at all. If I build a character with a 10d6 EB, I've paid 50 points. When I save up 5 xp, I go to 11d6. I save up another 5 xp and go up to 12d6. 5 more xp, 13d6. Sure looks linear to me.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I don't see how it's exponential at all. If I build a character with a 10d6 EB' date=' I've paid 50 points. When I save up 5 xp, I go to 11d6. I save up another 5 xp and go up to 12d6. 5 more xp, 13d6. Sure looks linear to me.[/quote']

 

It's not quite linear in that adding 5 points to a useless character rarely results in much improvement, but adding 5 points to a combat effective character can be very valuable.

 

Think of it in these terms - if you had an adjustment power where you could add 10 power points of any power to any character, where would it have the most value? A 0 point normal, or a pushing-all-the-limits combat monster?

[prestidigitator]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I don't see how it's exponential at all. If I build a character with a 10d6 EB' date=' I've paid 50 points. When I save up 5 xp, I go to 11d6. I save up another 5 xp and go up to 12d6. 5 more xp, 13d6. Sure looks linear to me.[/quote']

I believe he was referring to the fact that +5 to Characteristic, +1 to a roll, +1 DC, etc., is supposed to roughly represent being, "twice as effective."

[zornwil]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I believe he was referring to the fact that +5 to Characteristic' date=' +1 to a roll, +1 DC, etc., is supposed to roughly represent being, "twice as effective."[/quote']

Yes, correct, thanks.

 

And while that is not truly exponential in game mechanic, I should have said earlier, it begs a lot of implications - someone with 60 INT is 2048 times as quick-minded as the average person! Can you even conceive of that? Not really, I can't. And we have 2 characters in an INT war ranging into 150 territory. Now, I don't mind that, in fact I am enjoying it. But if one gets into the "true roleplaying" of these things and wants to deal with the in-character in-world ramifications of these exponential power meanings, it's really troublesome.

 

That being said, it doesn't trouble me, nor do I see a real need from my own perspective here. I never much valued that underlying "times two" thing in terms of trying to think it out realistically and look at it more as representing the physical and re the none-physical we are challenged to even think this way, so it's very abstract, I don't think we have to look at it in such a straightforward way, nor is the scalability in HERO really dependent on interpreting each +5 necessarily that way for all things, just really in terms of their relative impact and that this scaling makes sense in and of its effects and simulation desirability.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I believe he was referring to the fact that +5 to Characteristic' date=' +1 to a roll, +1 DC, etc., is supposed to roughly represent being, "twice as effective."[/quote']

 

I've never quite understood the assuption that +5 points equals x2 effectiveness/power. Does a 3d6 punch really do twice as much damage as a 2d6 punch? Versus a PD of 2 (human normal) it seems to get just under twice the STUN through, but infinate more BODY on average (1 to 0). Which part are we measuring? When we step up to 4d6, it only does a third more STUN than 3d6, but twice the BODY... doesn't seem linear or exponential to me. About the only times you get twice the effectiveness is in lifting for STR (but not damage or anything else), non-combat movement and extra followers.

[Vondy]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I'm still shocked people give out experience.

[DangerousDan]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I'm still shocked people give out experience.

 

Not all GMs do. But its part of their Job. If they don't do it, the players just might.

 

Some of the GMs I game with had their earliest experiences as players with GMs who were quite fond of killing off characters. Those GMs didn't give a whole lot of experience. What would be the point? Why bother allowing the player to improve a character who's only purpose is to die in an interesting manner?

 

The GMs I know who learned gaming under such twisted GMs are usually quite good about making the game interesting, and fortunately not so obsessed with killing off PCs, but they tend to forget to think about XP, although they are typically willing to think about (and give out) XP if the players nudge them.

 

I and some of the other GMs in the groups that I play in came from origins where the GM's focus was on having a fun, interactive fantasy, and having the characters develop over time was a fundamental part of that process. A rare, but not unknown phenomena is for a character to become less fun to play after experience.

 

I've only been playing with the Hero System for a few years now, and all of the experience accumulated by all of my characters combined would barely serve to fill the gap between the 250 cp starting point and the points needed to implement the starting concept of my third Hero character.

 

Why the third and not the first or second?

 

#1 didn't survive to his DEX rank in phase 12, which was something of a shock to everyone. Strangely enough, I never did play in that campaign again, but I do play in a (different) campaign with that GM. We both learned from the experience.

#2 survived and developed, but the campaign was a casualty of real-world events.

#3 started as a backup character in case the GM did a #1 on #2

[Vondy]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

It was intended as a wry jest.

 

As a long-time hero gm I've evolved my own method of dealing with character advancement (and character design). I don't set how many characters are based on, instead, I ask players to give me a detailed character description, and I build the character (which we tweak together). Its not uncommon for a heroic character I build to weigh in around 200 points. They get a solid character out of the starting gate. Then, as the game progresses, I hand out changes to the character sheet (perks they've earned, contacts they've made, things they've learned, skills they've used in game and improved). Its experience, but its not random spend it on anything experience. If the player wants to develop their character in a specific direction I keep it clearly in mind, and can often use it as the basis for a subplot, or occassionally, a major adventure.

 

I've found this creates organic advancement that keeps the characters recognizable, forces the players to actually consider development in a serious way, slows linear advancement that would otherwise blow game balance out of the water (most players wouldn't think to pick up a point in a language or an area knowledge when there are more and more and more combat skill levels to be had), and avoids "weird buys" (i.e., those things that make no sense outside the context of player whim: "Bob, why does Conan the mundane loving barbarian have a magic skill roll of 13- and a shortlist of spells? He didn't the last time I saw him." "Well, Dave, you see, I had some XPs saved up and I really felt a fireball would come in handy...").

 

My players have never complained.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

My players have never complained.

Oh really? Then why the persistant rumors you actually fled to Israel to avoid being tarred and feathered by your gaming group?

[DangerousDan]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

It was intended as a wry jest.

 

As a long-time hero gm I've evolved my own method of dealing with character advancement (and character design). I don't set how many characters are based on, instead, I ask players to give me a detailed character description, and I build the character (which we tweak together). Its not uncommon for a heroic character I build to weigh in around 200 points. They get a solid character out of the starting gate. Then, as the game progresses, I hand out changes to the character sheet (perks they've earned, contacts they've made, things they've learned, skills they've used in game and improved). Its experience, but its not random spend it on anything experience. If the player wants to develop their character in a specific direction I keep it clearly in mind, and can often use it as the basis for a subplot, or occassionally, a major adventure.

 

I've found this creates organic advancement that keeps the characters recognizable, forces the players to actually consider development in a serious way, slows linear advancement that would otherwise blow game balance out of the water (most players wouldn't think to pick up a point in a language or an area knowledge when there are more and more and more combat skill levels to be had), and avoids "weird buys" (i.e., those things that make no sense outside the context of player whim: "Bob, why does Conan the mundane loving barbarian have a magic skill roll of 13- and a shortlist of spells? He didn't the last time I saw him." "Well, Dave, you see, I had some XPs saved up and I really felt a fireball would come in handy...").

 

My players have never complained.

 

In one of the gaming groups I play in, there is a quote in a similar vein: "Can anyone explain why does Leopard-Girl have wings?" Since everyone is aware of the weird buy problem, it rarely happens. Almost all of the weird buying occurs when a character is first created. It may be simply that I've been lucky, but In the groups I play in, acquisition of language skills, background skills, professional skills and the like is quite common, for characters in 150 cp fantasy, 150 cp science-fiction, 250 cp superhero and even 350 cp superhero campaigns. And in any of these groups, if the GM said, "I'll make your characters for you..."

 

Well, we've got plenty of other GMs, so that just isn't going to happen. Assigned experience is fine and well, and no one objects to it, but if it were the sole method of character development, I and most of the other players I know would consider it insulting. They might complain, and if the GM disregarded their complaints, he could very easily find himself watching someone else GMing a game when he was scheduled to.

 

A GM has the power to control what happens in the game, but the players have the power to control whether the GM gets to run a game at all. It is a nicely self-balancing system if everyone understands this.

[atlascott]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I have players routinely complain that the XP awards and character progression is TOO SLOW--and compared to d20, it is. I think HERO has a MUCH easier to manage character advancement system. I dont think it is really appropriate to use the characteristic/power cost doubling in superheroic. I like it (the cost doubling past a certain point) for heroic campaigns to keep some semblance of realism, but tend to use it only on characteristics. It might be appropriate to have heroic characters develop fantastic skills.

 

After all, 50 character points, while really able to make a massive difference in character power level, would still take, on average, about 20 or more scenarios (most probably spanning 2 gaming sessions) to accomplish. It takes my group over 2 years to meet and game that much. Sure, "Lord of Bricks" could double his STR to 100 from 50 with those XP, but he is going to be a frustrated puppy unless he rather spends some of those XP on speed, and better defenses, or he will be a real-life one hit wonder. When all the other characters are taking 4 actions, and he is taking 2, and even the martial artist now has PD that rivals his, it doesnt take players long to figure out that it doesnt pay to spend everything in one charactertistic, ability, or power.

 

Campaign caps AT CHARACTER CREATION are fine. I dont enforce them on XP spent. If a PC wants to develop the strongest man on the planet, I dont stop him. Its a slow progression that hobbles him in other ways.

 

On the other hand, no campaign caps at character creation means SOMEONE in your group is going to design "Big Long Claw Man" with a 6d6 killing attack, some CSL's and lots of defenses. Good luck balancing that with "Commander USA" and "Shadow Mistress"--the more standard characters of the genre.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

 

My players have never complained.

 

I have players who want a lot more control than that. They want to build and tweak and constantly shift their points around between every adventure. This is their "fun" part of the game away from the table. While I certainly have influence as the GM... only with the newest of players who hasn't had time yet to really get to know Hero in depth, do I make their character... otherwise, I'm very hands off compared to other GMs, because players resent my tweakings as interference.

 

Well, I should say, half the players resent it. The half that don't, are also "less into the game" in general. I pay for intense, focused player involvement with a constant test of wills over detail and theory, player builds and group play styles, etc. Those more laid back about all that are also not as vested or passionate about the game. It is give and take.

 

EXP for me is flat... 3 per game (with Giant Sized Issue being 6 EXP) until you hit 450 points total... then it drops to 2 per game. In 18 years I've hand three massive blow out ULTIMATE FINALE! episodes... and those... for the charcters that survived... gave 10 EXP. I've had little or no problem with character growth being too fast... more with character CHANGES happening at the whim of a player who got up at 3:00 in the morning to edit his character because he had an idea.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

It's not quite linear in that adding 5 points to a useless character rarely results in much improvement' date=' but adding 5 points to a combat effective character can be very valuable.[/quote']

And how many useless characters have you created? Just because it's a better tactical decision, doesn't mean it isn't linear.

 

Think of it in these terms - if you had an adjustment power where you could add 10 power points of any power to any character, where would it have the most value? A 0 point normal, or a pushing-all-the-limits combat monster?

Depends on the situation. If an innocent bystander normal gets wounded in the battle, Aiding his BODY is much more useful than Aiding the BODY of the team brick who already has 30 BODY and defenses high enough that he probably won't take any BODY damage anyway. In any event, it's still linear: #d6 x Cost per die = Total Price.

 

I believe he was referring to the fact that +5 to Characteristic' date=' +1 to a roll, +1 DC, etc., is supposed to roughly represent being, "twice as effective."[/quote']

What does that mean? 12- Stealth is twice as effective as 11- Stealth? No. 13d6 does twice as much damage as 12d6? No. If it means anything at all, it's only as an abstract concept that has nothing to do with any game result or effect. The only things in the entire HERO system that are exponential are STR lifting capacity only (not HtH damage, leaping, figured chars, or any other aspect of STR), non-combat multiples for movement, MegaScale, Extended Area Effect, number of Charges, and number of Autofire Shots. Everything else in the game is linear.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

As Zornwil stated, the doubling is a bit abstract, but as far as doing damage is concerned, Body is supposed to go up with exponentially increasing mass (+1 Body per x2 mass), so in a sense you can correlate +1 DC to being twice as effective.

 

As for a +1 on a roll being twice as effective, I tend to think of it in two ways: 1.) A character who is, "twice as strong/dexterous/intelligent/impressive/etc," has +5 in their Characteristic and thus gets a +1 to an appropriate skill roll; 2.) if you consider the bell-shaped distribution 3d6 gives, a +1 actually comes pretty close to doubling your chances of success for the 3-8 range, and halving your chances of failure for the 13-18 range, which gives me a nice warm fuzzy.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

As Zornwil stated' date=' the doubling is a bit abstract but as far as doing damage is concerned, Body is supposed to go up with exponentially increasing mass (+1 Body per x2 mass), so [i']in a sense[/i] you can correlate +1 DC to being twice as effective.

Except that "mass" isn't really relevant to anything in the game except in how much you can lift with STR (or TK). You don't do damage against someones mass, you do damage to STUN and BODY - linearly.

 

As for a +1 on a roll being twice as effective, I tend to think of it in two ways: 1.) A character who is, "twice as strong/dexterous/intelligent/impressive/etc," has +5 in their Characteristic and thus gets a +1 to an appropriate skill roll;

Why? Is this in the rules anywhere? If it works for adding verisimilitude to your games, fine. Some people say this a lot, but apart from STR lifting and the other examples I mentioned, very little in the game is exponential. Most of it is linear. Of course, in order to create characters, monsters, equipment, etc., that reach into the "cosmic" level of power, you need some things to be exponentially increased, if you want to represent hand-held blasters and death stars in the same game, etc. However, in a heroic level game, there isn't necessarily a need for even STR lifting to be exponential, and if you house-rule it that way, the game still works just fine, and may even be more realistic and allow for finer granularity.

[Vondy]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I have players who want a lot more control than that.

 

My players helped evolve the system; I don't know the cause, but one day I started the game and the long-term core of four had gone from a bunch of number crunching power gamers to a troupe of dyed in the wool role-players. Onle of them remained a total pro from dover type, but he too was suddenly into the game more than the mechanics. And the players have a lot more control than would first appear. If they want something, they pretty much get it; and sometimes things that would generally take a long-time come much faster because they come when the story dictates they should, and not the numbers.

[Mentor]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

I have players routinely complain that the XP awards and character progression is TOO SLOW--and compared to d20, it is. I think HERO has a MUCH easier to manage character advancement system. I dont think it is really appropriate to use the characteristic/power cost doubling in superheroic. I like it (the cost doubling past a certain point) for heroic campaigns to keep some semblance of realism, but tend to use it only on characteristics. It might be appropriate to have heroic characters develop fantastic skills.

 

Another thing for players to consider is that a Fantasy Hero or Star Hero character with 150 character points and even more so, a Champions Superhero with 250 or 350 starting points should not be considered in any way "1st Level". I have found that to be the hardest concept change for most players with a purely D&D gaming background.

 

In Hero, one can start the game off as Indiana Jones or Spiderman, albeit perhaps fairly early in their careers, and not necessarily a 15 year old punk with a cast off saex aspiring to be a Berserker or some sackcloth clad rookie priest with a stick and a couple of chunks of hard boiled leather over the tender bits.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Idle Scalability Notion

 

Except that "mass" isn't really relevant to anything in the game except in how much you can lift with STR (or TK). You don't do damage against someones mass' date=' you do damage to STUN and BODY - linearly.[/quote']

You are right: it only increases, "exponentially," in the way it affects the environment in a dramatic sense (even when you consider movement that increases exponentially with increased cost, for how does that exponentially increase your effectiveness against an opponent?). Then again, a game in which damage, defenses, etc., truly increased exponentially would be completely unplayable; a character who bought up damage would just destroy targets unless those targets also increased their defenses by the same amount. So I submit that the, "exponentiality," of the Hero System is really the only useful kind of exponential scale in a gaming system.