Exponential VS Linear ?

[Fox1]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

So characters with enough growth become immune to normal attacks' date=' and many Area Effect attacks? .[/quote']

 

Growth in Hero is an exception, one that carries over into vehicles and causes all sorts of problems there.

 

Makes no sense, but it does match the comic genre, so its something you just have to live with.

 

 

The whole "change everything based on genre and SPX" doesn't work for me. I expect more from my game system.

 

It something you have to expect in a multiple genre system. It's a design requirement.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

I agree that there should be one system for going about attacking the planet.

 

I actually think that there is only one way to rate the Earth as a whole. Now that does not mean that you can't attack a tiny part of the Earth (which could be done hex-by-hex). Basically I think the difference is like attacking a door on an aircraft carrrier vs attacking the aircraft carrier as a whole--both are valid options, but the process is not identical.

 

And IMO the Earth is not very "wall-like" so I would not go by its thickness.

 

If you are attacking the planet as a whole, then the rules for assigning BODY to objects should be used (+1 BODY per X2 mass is the way to go).

 

Given this carries a ludicrous result, how can it be "the way to go"? I would have no problem saying that, for objects whose mas is the primary determinant of BOD, the rule becomes +5 BOD for every doubling of mass, just like "+5 = 2x" is the rule for every other characteristic.

 

Why doesn't a character with Growth or Density Increase get the same +5 BOD when his mass doubles? Because his ability to survive is not primarily dependent on mass. His overall health is relevant. If humans were that simple, the obese would have better survival odds than the slim. Similarly, Shriking continues to not reduce BOD at all.

 

BTW, there's a lot of discussion early on that movement doesn't follow the "+5 points = 2x" rule. Actually, it does, after a fashion. +5 points = x2 noncombat. If you are simply buying straight movement, 5 CP doubles it. If you want movement that allows for greater maneuverability in close quarters, doubling will cost something different than 5 points. Just like +5 STR costs 5 points and doubles lift, but if you want it to cost 0 END and be armor piercing, it costs more to double your lift capacity.

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Growth in Hero is an exception, one that carries over into vehicles and causes all sorts of problems there.

 

Makes no sense, but it does match the comic genre, so its something you just have to live with.

 

 

 

 

It something you have to expect in a multiple genre system. It's a design requirement.

Your 2 quotes seem contradictory to me:

 

Q1: "but it does match the comic genre, so its something you just have to live with"

 

Q2: "It something you have to expect in a multiple genre system"

 

Why should Hero cater to the comic genre if I'm running a game that has nothing to do with comic books?

 

 

Basically, I think that a system can be Universal with respect to setting, but not necessarily to genre.

[Fox1]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Why should Hero cater to the comic genre if I'm running a game that has nothing to do with comic books?

 

Because comics is HERO's first and best duty. Everything else was a tag on.

 

 

Basically, I think that a system can be Universal with respect to setting, but not necessarily to genre.

 

So you're intent is change HERO from the superheroic genre its currently designed for to a more realistic genre?

 

I think I'd just play GURPS myself.

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Given this carries a ludicrous result, how can it be "the way to go"?

Well if you assume that a 200d6 EB is basically something like the sum total energy released in a SuperNova (and actually probably quite a bit more), I don't think that the result is all that "ludicrous."

 

It seems to me that it is a question of "do you accept that Hero follows and exponential scale?" If you do, then 200d6 should destroy the Earth.

 

I would have no problem saying that, for objects whose mas is the primary determinant of BOD, the rule becomes +5 BOD for every doubling of mass, just like "+5 = 2x" is the rule for every other characteristic.

That would be fine except for the fact that 1 DC (5 Points of STR or EB)basically equals 1 BODY. Thus every doubling of power (each extra DC) represents your ability to double the mass of what you can destroy.

 

What you are suggesting would contradict that relationship.

 

If each extra doubling of mass = +5 BODY, then I would have to increase the magnitude of my EB by a factor of X32 (+5 DCs) before I could compensate. And IMO that situation would be ludicrous.

 

 

 

 

BTW, there's a lot of discussion early on that movement doesn't follow the "+5 points = 2x" rule. Actually, it does, after a fashion. +5 points = x2 noncombat. If you are simply buying straight movement, 5 CP doubles it. If you want movement that allows for greater maneuverability in close quarters, doubling will cost something different than 5 points. Just like +5 STR costs 5 points and doubles lift, but if you want it to cost 0 END and be armor piercing, it costs more to double your lift capacity.

I did already mention that non-combat movement is exponential (I believe in the first post of this thread).

 

Your STR analogy falls apart because 0 END STR is still on an exponential scale, even though it costs a bit more to double.

 

And I would have no problem with +10 points per X2 combat velocity (as opposed to +5 per X2 non-combat). In fact +10 per X2 Velocity would be in line with what I'd suggest, and it would be in line with the gains in Kinetic Energy (each X2 Velocity = X4 KE, in other words you get +2 DCs per each X2 velocity) .

 

The problem is that the current system for combat velocity is linear. That makes it almost impossible to get a character who can do Mach 3 in combat (without spending 1000s of points).

 

And unless you use the optional Velocity Damage method, damage from velocity is linear, with doesn't match with an exponential pattern (that is why a Mach 3 character could destroy the Earth).

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Because comics is HERO's first and best duty. Everything else was a tag on.

 

 

 

 

So you're intent is change HERO from the superheroic genre its currently designed for to a more realistic genre?

I'm not interested in the SuperHeroic Genre; and I don't think that 5th Edition Hero is only about that.

[Fox1]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

I'm not interested in the SuperHeroic Genre; and I don't think that 5th Edition Hero is only about that.

 

It's only about that when you start pulling at the seams.

 

In Game Design like many things, form follows function. HERO started out as a Superhero game and at its core are the same decisions of design that allowed it to function in that role.

 

You can modify it. You can layer rules for other genres.

 

But if you want to still play HERO, you can't deep down change it into something it just isn't.

 

You can however move to another game system. Just up and replace it.

 

Frankly, given what you've written in this thread it seems to me that you DON"T want to play HERO. Rather than use another game or design your own as most other gamers would do- instead you want to change HERO into another game that fits YOUR desires and requirements.

 

And that takes the game away from people who like what they have just fine.

 

Rather rude of you I think.

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

It's only about that when you start pulling at the seams.

 

In Game Design like many things, form follows function. HERO started out as a Superhero game and at its core are the same decisions of design that allowed it to function in that role.

 

You can modify it. You can layer rules for other genres.

 

But if you want to still play HERO, you can't deep down change it into something it just isn't.

 

You can however move to another game system. Just up and replace it.

 

Frankly, given what you've written in this thread it seems to me that you DON"T want to play HERO. Rather than use another game or design your own as most other gamers would do- instead you want to change HERO into another game that fits YOUR desires and requirements.

 

And that takes the game away from people who like what they have just fine.

 

Rather rude of you I think.

So what you're saying is that going to an completely exponential system for velocity would "ruin" Hero?

 

You're saying that allowing characters to go Mach 3 in combat would be against the SuperHero genre?

[Fox1]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

So what you're saying is that going to an completely exponential system for velocity would "ruin" Hero?

 

You're saying that allowing characters to go Mach 3 in combat would be against the SuperHero genre?

 

I saying that lowering the current velocity damage modifiers (which is what moving to a EXP system here does) is breaking some versions of Superheroes in order to favor another version.

 

Not only do I not want to play your version, I consider such concepts the realm not of game design changes- but rather something that should solely be considered under optional and House Rules.

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

I saying that lowering the current velocity damage modifiers (which is what moving to a EXP system here does) is breaking some versions of Superheroes in order to favor another version.

 

Not only do I not want to play your version, I consider such concepts the realm not of game design changes- but rather something that should solely be considered under optional and House Rules.

My Version:

 

1) Allows Characters to do things like move at Mach 3 in combat

 

2) Keeps silly things from happening (like having a Mach 3 character destroy the Earth)

 

3) Moves Velocity Damage into line with the rest of the system.

 

And it sounds like the only argument that you can come up with against it is that it would require some characters who are built under linear velocity rules to be changed. Any major change in the rules is going to require that some characters get rewritten.

[Kristopher]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

The problem with +1 BODY per x2 mass is that is leads people to believe that entire planets can be destroyed by something like 80 BODY damage.

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

The problem with +1 BODY per x2 mass is that is leads people to believe that entire planets can be destroyed by something like 80 BODY damage.

Assuming an exponential scale, do you know how powerful an 80d6 EB would be?

[Fox1]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

1) Allows Characters to do things like move at Mach 3 in combat

 

Does nothing for me.

 

I don't want characters moving that fast in combat, not of my setting have characters who move that fast in combat.

 

Moreover I don't what the range of damage reduced for the characters I do have just to so I fit your character concepts in the rules I'm using.

 

Do a house rule for your campaign if this is important to you.

 

2) Keeps silly things from happening (like having a Mach 3 character destroy the Earth)

 

Already proved that was impossible unless the GM rules it acceptable in his setting/genre.

 

3) Moves Velocity Damage into line with the rest of the system.

 

Same point a item #1 really.

 

Again, it crushes the low end of the scale. I play in that low in of the scale. You're reducing differences between my characters and ruining my game experience.

 

Do a house rule for your campaign if this is important to you.

 

Leave my game alone.

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Does nothing for me.

 

I don't want characters moving that fast in combat, not of my setting have characters who move that fast in combat.

So if I was to make the argument that: "none of the characters in my setting can lift vast amounts of weight, so therefore lifting should not be exponential," you'd buy that argument right?

 

Maybe nobody has a Cosmic Power Pool in your games, does that mean the option should be written out of the rules?

 

 

I would argue that the system should be set up to allow for flexibility of concept (that could be lifting 1,000,000 tons, or flying at Mach 3 in combat). If individual GMs want to impose limits (nobody flies more than 100 mph in combat, or lifts more than 5 tons), those limits should be up to the individual GM rather than hard-coded into the rules.

[casualplayer]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Guys, you are reasoning from effect and straying away from the rules. The Mach 3 man had better have some sort of power modifier influencing more than just the point of impact, or all he will do is really, really hurt the relatively tiny point of impact. You don't get kinetic (or any energy for that matter) transference for free; you didn't spend the points or scorch off a heck of a power stunt, you got nothing. If I punch somebody for +20 BODY more than is needed to kill him, do I kill his closest friend? This ain't trample damage.

 

The 200 sticks of dynamite, unless they are a synchronized shaped charge, will fight each other. They blow up omni-directionally and the interior sticks of the bundle will fight the exterior ones for little net gain. I ain't willing to do the math, but if anything is broken it's whatever goofy rule said you can just pile dynamite like cordwood for a bigger, more destructive bang.

 

As far as Casual STR, I threw that screwy rule out years ago. Casual STR is -20 STR from the character's full STR, -30 STR in Heroic games. I can bench ~110 kg and I can carry around 1/16 (or 1/64) of that weight all day. It does make super-brick's Casual STR much more impressive but I game-smooth that out in two ways. I almost always make bricks buy 0 END for at least their Casual STR amount (burning points in exchange for usefullness) and I make it difficult for bricks to use less than their Casual STR unless they have put effort into it (5pt Phys Lim for no net.)

 

Everytime this rules system tries to combine addition and multiplication it falls flat on it's face. It's always a small error that gets added upon and multiplied and so on. It really favors the math-maniacs who realize that a small investment with compound interest always trumps the Texas-sized purchase.

 

Wanna really despair? Take a thoughtful look at the Leaping and Throwing rules. Why can't my 60 STR brick put a baseball into orbit? Every bit of oomph that isn't devoted to lifting the ball is dedicated to flinging it. That's a lot of thrust, not just +70 STR over the weight of the ball.

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Guys, you are reasoning from effect and straying away from the rules. The Mach 3 man had better have some sort of power modifier influencing more than just the point of impact, or all he will do is really, really hurt the relatively tiny point of impact.

The problem is that the rules don't cover this aspect. The rules (under breaking things) give +1 BODY per X2 Mass. But, as far as I know, they do not anywhere suggest when an object becomes immune to being destroyed by normal attacks.

 

And to simply suggest that large objects should be immune to non-area attacks doesn't do it for me. If a man sized object was to strike the Earth at near the speed of light--that impact should cause massive devistation.

 

 

 

Wanna really despair? Take a thoughtful look at the Leaping and Throwing rules. Why can't my 60 STR brick put a baseball into orbit? Every bit of oomph that isn't devoted to lifting the ball is dedicated to flinging it. That's a lot of thrust, not just +70 STR over the weight of the ball.

 

Please refer to my intro post in this thread:

Combat Velocity (default method, the optional Velocity Table works in an Exponential Fashion), Damage Accumulation, Casual STR lift, Throwing, and Explosives all work in a linear fashion.

And I should add that I include "leaping" under "Combat Velocity."

 

Basically that is one more aspect of the Linear VS Exponential problem. I'd like it to all be consistant (one way or the other--of course, preferably Exponential)

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Moreover I don't what the range of damage reduced for the characters I do have just to so I fit your character concepts in the rules I'm using.

 

Do a house rule for your campaign if this is important to you.

I've got another example of Linear Damage for you to sign off on:

 

Lets us say the Joe Average is given 2 cool gifts: Invulnerbility and a Jet Pack. And this pack can fly at 112 mph in combat.

 

And BTW, 150" Flight (with 2 SPD) = 300" per turn = 600 m per Turn = 3,000 m per minute = 180 kmph = 111.9 mph

 

So a guy doing a Move Through at 111.9 mph would yield 50d6 Damage (from speed alone). That would also be like a 16.5d6 Killing attack.

 

Are you willing to go on record as saying that this result is totally in line with everything else in Hero? And I'd like you to affirm that, in your mind, this result is far more realistic than the 9 DCs of velocity damage given in the optional velocity method.

 

Do you realize that Joe-Jet-Pack would punch a human sized through a 1 mile thick armored metal wall? Or do enough damage to fully and totally destroy a large ship?

 

Why have tank guns (which do much less damage), when you could have a metal dummy on a motorcycle doing a move through? (and some dummies on some bikes can even do better than 111 mph)

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

I've got another example of Linear Damage for you to sign off on:

 

Lets us say the Joe Average is given 2 cool gifts: Invulnerbility and a Jet Pack. And this pack can fly at 112 mph in combat.

 

And BTW, 150" Flight (with 2 SPD) = 300" per turn = 600 m per Turn = 3,000 m per minute = 180 kmph = 111.9 mph

 

So a guy doing a Move Through at 111.9 mph would yield 50d6 Damage (from speed alone). That would also be like a 16.5d6 Killing attack.

 

Are you willing to go on record as saying that this result is totally in line with everything else in Hero? And I'd like you to affirm that, in your mind, this result is far more realistic than the 9 DCs of velocity damage given in the optional velocity method.

 

Do you realize that Joe-Jet-Pack would punch a human sized through a 1 mile thick armored metal wall? Or do enough damage to fully and totally destroy a large ship?

 

Why have tank guns (which do much less damage), when you could have a metal dummy on a motorcycle doing a move through? (and some dummies on some bikes can even do better than 111 mph)

 

 

But...

Thats like, Joe Normal with a Jetpack.

If Bob Hero flys at 112 MPH (300"/turn) with his 6 speed, his combat move is only 50", so his velocity based move through damage adder is only +18D6. much more survivable, for the exact same velocity.

 

but...

but...

something smells, don't it

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

But...

Thats like, Joe Normal with a Jetpack.

If Bob Hero flys at 112 MPH (300"/turn) with his 6 speed, his combat move is only 50", so his velocity based move through damage adder is only +18D6. much more survivable, for the exact same velocity.

 

but...

but...

something smells, don't it

That is one more reason why the optional (exponential) velocity method works better than the standard one, the optional method is based on actual velocity, not the character's move per phase.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

That is one more reason why the optional (exponential) velocity method works better than the standard one' date=' the optional method is based on actual velocity, not the character's move per phase.[/quote']

 

Very logical and reasoned. Of course, the game effect is that I get to buy up my Speed and get added damage out of it as well. Speed's a pretty useful thing before I get added damage. Significant changes to the system tend to have a ripple effect.

 

You support a lot of your damage/velocity recommendations with real world physics, however you then discuss a character flying at mach 3 in combat. What happens to the sonic boom? Without it, your suggestions also employ selective physics, just to a different extent.

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Very logical and reasoned. Of course, the game effect is that I get to buy up my Speed and get added damage out of it as well. Speed's a pretty useful thing before I get added damage. Significant changes to the system tend to have a ripple effect.

 

You support a lot of your damage/velocity recommendations with real world physics, however you then discuss a character flying at mach 3 in combat. What happens to the sonic boom? Without it, your suggestions also employ selective physics, just to a different extent.

You are right; there are other factors involved.

 

And it would be cool to handle secondary effects. I'll consider that one a bit and maybe post more later.

 

Right now though, I'll simply say that I'd expect these game system models to be approximations (as even Newtonian Physics models are approximations). Approximations are not perfect, but I believe that some are better than others.

[Kristopher]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Assuming an exponential scale' date=' do you know how powerful an 80d6 EB would be?[/quote']

 

Do you know how much energy it would take to destroy a planet?

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

Do you know how much energy it would take to destroy a planet?

Actually I can make a pretty good guess.

 

1) Let us say that we know how much energy it takes to vaporize a given (small) amount of rock--say maybe what it takes to destroy 1 KG of rock.

 

2) We can assume that it would take 10 X that amount of Energy to vaporize 10 X the amount of rock.

 

3) Given the mass of the Earth (5.98 X 10^24 kg) we can project what it would take to vaporize that much rock, and come up with a "ball-park" figure for how much energy it would take to destroy a planet.

 

 

Added on Edit: (where's the Math in Hero "powers of 2" terms) It should take 83d6 more to vaporize a chuck of rock the size of the Earth, than it takes to vaporize a 1kg rock.

 

(that is assuming that you accept the concept that Hero works on an exponential model)

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

This formerly linear thread has taken on truly exponential proportions.

 

I'd be in way over my head by jumping in at this point, so I'd just like to say:

 

"PARTY AT MY PLACE! Free beer and lovely ladies! Whooooo!"

[Warp9]

Re: Exponential VS Linear ?

 

This formerly linear thread has taken on truly exponential proportions.

 

I'd be in way over my head by jumping in at this point, so I'd just like to say:

 

"PARTY AT MY PLACE! Free beer and lovely ladies! Whooooo!"

I will not consider it to have taken on truly exponential proportions until it reaches 2^10 posts.

 

But I will accept your free beer and your lovely ladies :jawdrop: