Are you engaged in the DEX race?

[Gary]

Originally posted by Rick

Ok he had he had 6 5 point dcv only levels and aplethera of varius 3 and 5 point combat levels. He had no range ability for the most part so I had no use for all around combat levels. Like I said lots of points.

 

That's very expensive. Someone who spent an equal amount of points in Dex instead of levels would clean his clock. However, I suppose it would work in a tightly controlled campaign world. Still, you haven't really saved anything from lowered dex, and in fact have paid more for the same effect.

 

The blasters or bricks without these DCV levels would be in trouble though...

[Gary]

Originally posted by Rick

Gary you still haven't realized that this was a lower power level campaign 6d6 ebs weren't scary but could do some stun to my PC. Even When the viper agents roled out W/their 8d6 blaster our brick could roll three of in a a turn he liked a good challenge.

 

With his low OCV, the agent being attacked could simply block or dodge, especially if he has basic martial arts. Eventually, 6-8 agents with 8D6 EB's should win unless the brick started throwing cars at them. They'll win a lot faster if they used AK-47s.

 

You stated that this was 350 pts. 350 isn't low power.

[Rick]

Like we care if Dex is cheaper in the long run, it's the type of campaign it was. I wanted a peak human type guy, and in 4th ed they were very clear as to what that meant. If the only thing we concerned our selfs W/was: what is more cost effective, character concepts would slowly start sliding away. We develope a concept W/in the parameters of our GM's campaign and then everything else is just book work.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Rick

Like we care if Dex is cheaper in the long run, it's the type of campaign it was. I wanted a peak human type guy, and in 4th ed they were very clear as to what that meant. If the only thing we concerned our selfs W/was: what is more cost effective, character concepts would slowly start sliding away. We develope a concept W/in the parameters of our GM's campaign and then everything else is just book work.

 

Part of your stated rationale for lowering dexes/spds was to save points.

[Rick]

point level has only a little to do W/power level. GM's set power levels, points don't set power levels.

 

Given that on an average role the agent W/an 8d6 eb is still bouncing attacks off of the bricks Defences, I don't all of the dodging in the world is all of that scary, an Ak47 is what 2d6 RKA, ok lots of Rpd. And yes cars make wonderful add ons to str. One of the beauties of having a 50 strength.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Rick

point level has only a little to do W/power level. GM's set power levels, points don't set power levels.

 

Given that on an average role the agent W/an 8d6 eb is still bouncing attacks off of the bricks Defences, I don't all of the dodging in the world is all of that scary, an Ak47 is what 2d6 RKA, ok lots of Rpd. And yes cars make wonderful add ons to str. One of the beauties of having a 50 strength.

 

On an average attack, the 8d6 is getting 3.8 stun through 25 defenses. Since the agent with 6 OCV is hitting on a 13- vs a 4 DCV, that's an 83% chance of success. 1 agent blocking or dodging and 5-6 attacking would mean that the damage adds up surprisingly quickly.

 

With 6 agents with AKs, someone is going to get the high stun multiple eventually, especially with 2 hits on average per attack.

 

The car is the brick's only chance.

[Trebuchet]

Originally posted by Rick

point level has only a little to do W/power level. GM's set power levels, points don't set power levels.

Concept sets power level; if the GM has to enforce power levels then the players are doing something wrong. In my 12-year-old campaign when we jumped from 4th Edition 250-point characters to the same characters at 350 point 5th Edition levels, not a single character increased their DEX, SPD, defenses, or combat levels. Only one character, the team brick, increased her damage dice by 2d6, and that was at the behest of the GMs. If you have a solid character concept, then you can say "Yep, she could do that" or "Nope, she can't do that."

 

In general terms, points do provide levels of power. Given a well balanced character design, a 350 point character will almost always beat a 250 point character, just as a 500 point character will usually stomp a 350 point character. Of course it is possible to build characters that break this general principle, but few of those characters will be well balanced.

[Guest Champsguy]

Guys guys guys, I don't have to post Captain Beat-Down again, do I?

 

Let me make this real simple, okay?

 

Yes, you can build a Captain America with only a 20 Str and a 20 Dex and a 4 Spd. This doesn't make him a "better" character than the guy with a 30 Str, 30 Dex, 7 Spd Cap. After all, I doubt anyone would say that Captain Beat-Down is any closer to "what a normal human could do" than Thanos of Titan, even though his stats were all within NCM.

 

One of the problems that I have with a 20 Dex, 4 Spd Cap is that he'll get whomped on by characters he should beat.

 

Listen up: Cap doesn't just fight agents. He also fights teams of supers. He fights guys with Area Effect attacks. He fights people with VPPs.

 

I know you're really proud of your 350 point Cap. I know you think he'd beat everybody else's Cap. I know you think it's a superior design, that you've somehow found the magically-overlooked key to success that everyone else has callously overlooked.

 

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The all-CSL Cap will get his fanny tanned by half the characters I have. All those levels? They don't apply when I throw a car at your hex. You'll have to abort to dive for cover. The real Cap won't care, because he's got a great Speed. When my 6 Spd brick starts throwing large chunks of building, large cars, and hand grenades at you, you'll burn your phases while you dive for cover. And then your DCV will suck.

 

If you say "But your brick should only have a 3 Spd!" then you've just proven my point. Your 4 Spd Cap just can't compete with a guy with a higher Speed. Game Over.

[Morningstar]

Trebuchet, Champsguy,

 

Some very good points. Where have you been for the last 100 posts of this thread!?

[Rick]

First off, Gary we're now entering the area of concept execution. If I'm a Super Agent normal human being I don't want as a player to have exorbinent amounts of dex. To get a 15 DCV I need a 45 dex...that doesn't fit my concept of normal human being. Yes you can say it's cheeper, it's not bout cheaper it's about concept. Yes the martial artist given all of his levels he needs will not save on the lower Dex and spd limits, most others will though.

 

Second off, Champsguy. If any of your comments are directed at me go and reread this thread than see what i'm actually talking about. Cap't only needs a 6-7 spd if 5 spd is what is common.

 

You'll also note that my cap't isn't a 20dex 4spd. That would however invovle actually reading this thread. I also told no one that their brick must be a 3 spd.

[Nucleon]

Originally posted by Gary

Have you ever actually played a dex 20 spd 4 MA in a 350+ campaign? I've been playing and gaming over 15 years. I believe I know what I'm talking about when I say that this MA won't be competitive.

That's two things that you have yet to convince me of.

 

Those levels and the normal +2 with martial strike do not work vs ranged attacks! It's a little tiring repeating myself.

Well, if that's tiring, stop. Not counting the fact that you're wrong too. If I use Martial Strike, I got the +2 DCV vs all personal, physical attacks, as well as any CSLs I have put there too. I challenge you to prove the contrary, or else just let it go, man. It's tiring for me too.

 

I thought this discussion was about what Cap should be, not what you can afford.

It is a discussion about how in concept do you stay if you give your characters ridiculous amounts of DEX, and how to get exactly what you need to obtain the same effectiveness or more.

 

Cap was merely an exemple. I would make him as I have said, not more even if that was more efficient, which is not the case.

 

While you're there, why don't you give your "Cap" a 60 STR, Absorption, regeneration, mental powers and desolidification as well? You'll be much more effective. We could call him the Munchkin-Earth Cap.

 

[Stargazer]

Originally posted by Gary

Batman doesn't merely have 20 dex and 4 spd. If he did, he wouldn't be competitive. He probably has 26-28 dex and 6 spd.

 

I refuse to believe that Batman is only moderately superior to the typical Dex 14 Spd 3 goon that he fights. He acts at least twice as often, not only 33% more often.

 

if u think batman as any sort of super habilities then ur Way out of it....

batman is only max human nothing more...but he maximum human in everything (almost)

and u say bats acts twice as often as the goon he fights...think about that...cause the goons he fights normal everyday thugs!!!!!!!! regular joes with a gun or a baseball bat!!! man where have u read ur batman comic???? planet X ???? and when bats has to fight superpowered vilains (normaly with the JLA, or those of his but they are usualy low end super powered) he sometimes is slower and less dexterous..again i his brain!! (and a good dose of CSL and a very good find weakness)

batman can take superman..because he ALWAYS has a plan..again using his brain...not is dex or speed.....

 

same goes with cap....against norm hell be twice as fast....against superpowered ppl..he uses his brain and experience......then his dex...and usualy fight supers with a team or partner...rarely alone......

[Monolith]

You guys must be right. Cap and Batman are only 20 DEX, 4 SPD characters. Too bad neither one of them can beat up Nighthawk from the Champions; you know, a beginning level non-superpowered superhero.

 

I have only been on the message boards about 10 months and I think I have seen this same NCM argument about 5 times. You would think you could all find something new to argue about once and a while.

[Nucleon]

Originally posted by Trebuchet

Players and GMs must recognize that all characteristics are relative within each individual campaign, not on a Cosmic Scale of Characteristicsâ„¢. If the average team brick is a DEX 11 3 SPD ,then perhaps the martial artists can get by with a 20 DEX 4 SPD. But if the bricks are at DEX 18 SPD 4 then the martial artist needs to be faster. In general, I think a martial artist should be at least 50% faster than a typical brick in the campaign. (...) Superheroes should be amazing athletes, it's part of the genre.

 

I'm not bound by "genres", I'm bound by concept. There are few things as generic "Bricks" in my campaignd. I've got Speedster Bricks, Mentalist Martial Artists, Animalists E-projs, Scientific Bricks, Shifting M-Artists, M-Artists E-Proj, and many, many more.

 

I don't tell a player "Look. Your character's obviously a brick. 30 Dex is too high. Please bring that down to 23 max.", but rather "How come your DEX is 30 if you didn't mention he was super agile, nor came with a reasonable science-fantasy cause. Work on that."

 

Often, the player decide that his hero is mutant or altered. I have no problems with that. This one plays a tiger shifting character? A DEX of 35 may be of order, as well as a high SPD. Another wants to play "a normal guy" with lots of training and pride of his human nature? Yeah, why not.

 

Is prof Charles Xavier an amazing athlete?

[Nucleon]

Originally posted by Champsguy

Yes, you can build a Captain America with only a 20 Str and a 20 Dex and a 4 Spd. This doesn't make him a "better" character than the guy with a 30 Str, 30 Dex, 7 Spd Cap. (...) One of the problems that I have with a 20 Dex, 4 Spd Cap is that he'll get whomped on by characters he should beat. (...) Your 4 Spd Cap just can't compete with a guy with a higher Speed. Game Over.

 

Hey, all those pts not invested in DEX or SPD did went somewhere, don't you think? Or do you simply think "speedsters" are above all that could be created as characters?

 

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The all-CSL Cap will get his fanny tanned by half the characters I have. All those levels? They don't apply when I throw a car at your hex. You'll have to abort to dive for cover. The real Cap won't care, because he's got a great Speed. When my 6 Spd brick starts throwing large chunks of building, large cars, and hand grenades at you, you'll burn your phases while you dive for cover. And then your DCV will suck.

I think you assume too much.

 

Among other things you assume that Cap's player will play like an ass. If a reasonably intelligent player is playing vs a fast brick surrounded by throwable junk and with no form of cover to impede on his LOS, he will eliminate direct confrontation as an option, don't you think?

 

However shocking that may seems, it is quite possible that some other character beats Cap, you know...

 

[Nucleon]

Originally posted by Monolith

You guys must be right. Cap and Batman are only 20 DEX, 4 SPD characters. Too bad neither one of them can beat up Nighthawk from the Champions; you know, a beginning level non-superpowered superhero.

At the same amounts of points, why not? If that Nighthawk of your is well built...

 

With a difference of 100-200 pts, I highly doubt it.

 

I have only been on the message boards about 10 months and I think I have seen this same NCM argument about 5 times. You would think you could all find something new to argue about once and a while.

Well, I hope you're still free to ignore this thread, Living Titan.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Nucleon

That's two things that you have yet to convince me of.

 

 

Well, if that's tiring, stop. Not counting the fact that you're wrong too. If I use Martial Strike, I got the +2 DCV vs all personal, physical attacks, as well as any CSLs I have put there too. I challenge you to prove the contrary, or else just let it go, man. It's tiring for me too.

 

Read page 35 of the rulebook. It specifically states that the 3 pt CSL can only be applied as DCV vs the same types of attacks for which it could increase OCV. And it has a specific example of a swordfighting martial arts level which can increase DCV in HTH, but not in range combat. It's right there in the rule books. So all 10 of your 3 pt CSLs with MA are worth nothing vs ranged attacks.

 

Originally posted by Nucleon

It is a discussion about how in concept do you stay if you give your characters ridiculous amounts of DEX, and how to get exactly what you need to obtain the same effectiveness or more.

 

Cap was merely an exemple. I would make him as I have said, not more even if that was more efficient, which is not the case.

 

While you're there, why don't you give your "Cap" a 60 STR, Absorption, regeneration, mental powers and desolidification as well? You'll be much more effective. We could call him the Munchkin-Earth Cap.

 

 

That's the problem. You somehow think that 30 dex is ridiculous, but 28 str is ok.

 

Page 28 of the Champions Universe specifically states that Legendary Humans can reach 30 in physical stats. And they don't come any more legendary than Captain America.

[Starlord]

Originally posted by Gary

Read page 35 of the rulebook. It specifically states that the 3 pt CSL can only be applied as DCV vs the same types of attacks for which it could increase OCV. And it has a specific example of a swordfighting martial arts level which can increase DCV in HTH, but not in range combat. It's right there in the rule books. So all 10 of your 3 pt CSLs with MA are worth nothing vs ranged attacks.

 

 

 

That's the problem. You somehow think that 30 dex is ridiculous, but 28 str is ok.

 

Page 28 of the Champions Universe specifically states that Legendary Humans can reach 30 in physical stats. And they don't come any more legendary than Captain America.

 

He's not going to listen, Gary. Its obvious at this point he'd rather ignore the rules and stated genre conventions just so he won't have to admit he's wrong. I've seen these people before.

[Shaun Hendricks]

Re: Re: Re: Interesting...

 

Originally posted by Starlord

Never played with limits, either. Never had a problem with stat races, either. Even 20 years ago when we were all 13-14 year olds.

 

I suspect stat escalation it has nothing to do with rules problems, its more of a player/GM maturity problem.

 

When I role-play via the internet, I play (and GM) without a system at all... the story rules the 'game' as it were. So I agree with the post here, but the ultimate extension of that 'logic' is simple cooperative storytelling. The GM builds the universe, runs the NPC's and the Player runs the protagonist. This works well in solo-player games, but tends to break down with multiple players. Thus the system is needed to act as a comparative restraint method to the players, even if they are incredibly mature. By nature, people (read: players) are competitve with each other.

No, limits aren't necessary, but you still must have SOME kind of limits on the game, be they CV, Points or ceilings of other sorts. You can't have one player build "Docter Dexterity" with CV's in the neighborhood of 20 and someone else build "Miss Manners" who only has CV's in the sub 10 range. These characters can't face the same badguys, can't fight well as a team. As a GM, when you say "I want your CV's between 8-11" you have just set a limit. "Doctor Dex" may end up with an 11 CV and tons of levels of Lightning Reflexes to make up the character conception points, but in the end, you have to have a realistic 'spread' of characters and this requires limits to both the upper and lower end of the stat/power/skill spectrum.

 

My current ruling philosophy for players is: use as many points as you like, but here's your CV/Power/Skill limits. We've even developed a sophisticated 'balancing' system for these limits so that they can 'slide' around in relation to one another and keep characters balanced between each other. It seems to work really well and also keeps the badguys balanced in relation to the players without much hassle.

[Starlord]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Interesting...

 

Originally posted by Shaun Hendricks

When I role-play via the internet, I play (and GM) without a system at all... the story rules the 'game' as it were. So I agree with the post here, but the ultimate extension of that 'logic' is simple cooperative storytelling. The GM builds the universe, runs the NPC's and the Player runs the protagonist. This works well in solo-player games, but tends to break down with multiple players. Thus the system is needed to act as a comparative restraint method to the players, even if they are incredibly mature. By nature, people (read: players) are competitve with each other.

No, limits aren't necessary, but you still must have SOME kind of limits on the game, be they CV, Points or ceilings of other sorts. You can't have one player build "Docter Dexterity" with CV's in the neighborhood of 20 and someone else build "Miss Manners" who only has CV's in the sub 10 range. These characters can't face the same badguys, can't fight well as a team. As a GM, when you say "I want your CV's between 8-11" you have just set a limit. "Doctor Dex" may end up with an 11 CV and tons of levels of Lightning Reflexes to make up the character conception points, but in the end, you have to have a realistic 'spread' of characters and this requires limits to both the upper and lower end of the stat/power/skill spectrum.

 

My current ruling philosophy for players is: use as many points as you like, but here's your CV/Power/Skill limits. We've even developed a sophisticated 'balancing' system for these limits so that they can 'slide' around in relation to one another and keep characters balanced between each other. It seems to work really well and also keeps the badguys balanced in relation to the players without much hassle.

 

Sure thing, but...we still never set ANY limits whatsoever (well, other than the obvious one: total points). The points balance themselves. If you build a guy with 100 DEX in a 350 point game, he still has ALOT of weaknesses. Now metagame-wise, we all agreed to have our schtick and noone was allowed to infringe too much on that. The MA never came too close to the speedster who never infringed on the 'weird powers' guy who never infringed on the straight 'energy projector', etc. Occasionally, we would agree to always allocate a certain number of points to skills/talents/perks.

[Shaun Hendricks]

Arguments for Arguments sake...

 

You guys do realize you are debating make-believe characters, which rely on a great deal of personal perception as to abilities and capabilities, as well as rules to a system which seem to be flavored by the 'author of the moment' and some built in flaws that spawn massive amounts of house rules in many gaming groups.

 

Is it REALLY worth it to start sniping at each other and making this personal? Dunno about you guys but I'd rather have a bunch of friends with the sytem in common than enemies made by getting technical or devisive.

 

Just some food for thought...

[Shaun Hendricks]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Interesting...

 

Originally posted by Starlord

Sure thing, but...we still never set ANY limits whatsoever (well, other than the obvious one: total points). The points balance themselves. If you build a guy with 100 DEX in a 350 point game, he still has ALOT of weaknesses. Now metagame-wise, we all agreed to have our schtick and noone was allowed to infringe too much on that. The MA never came too close to the speedster who never infringed on the 'weird powers' guy who never infringed on the straight 'energy projector', etc. Occasionally, we would agree to always allocate a certain number of points to skills/talents/perks.

 

On the surface, that 'seems' to be the case, however, my group have discovered major flaws with the 'total points' acting as a balancer. This doesn't come out as much in playing Super Heroes as it does in other genres, since the Hero System was primarilly designed for Super Heroes. You can still come across problems in total points though. Due to the way the rules are applied and how points are assigned, you can have a great character conception but with no cheap way to build a medium to low utility ability, even if it's central to the concept. You can (and we have found "frequently") end up with characters built on the same points as others yet can't hold a candle to them in combat. It's the old efficiency arguments about which class is most point efficient, and the problem there is, it's very TRUE, there are more efficient classes of character archetypes, and this is because of the cost and point breaks. Therefore, relying on total points as your absolute arbiter of character ability would seem highly suspect to me in an advanced building environment. I'm sure you are using corrective mechanisms, of some kind or another. There's nothing worse than spending hours and hours on building a characer only to find they don't work as intended OR can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag.

Let me say this again, clearly, it's not as bad in Supers as it is in other genre's, but since I tend to use Hero for other genre's and play few Supers, it's a problem I've had to face often and have discovered that limits on the abilites work FAR better as a balancing scale than point total limits. I can build a 1000 point character that doesn't exceed human normals and has no super powers, and might even be able to fight a low powered super, BUT that doesn't mean the character is inefficient, it just means that they have a greater depth of abilities than even a 350 super. It also means that I forced combat and power limits on them, and it means that other talented normal humans (even in the same party) can be just as useful in combat or max ability as the heavy pointer. So now, to use your logic to it's fullest, the points don't matter, but the end product in abilities do, and those need to balance in order to make the 'team' work. You just seem to have gotten lucky that your players are dialed in well enough as a team that they instinctively build compatable characters. Not everyone has that kind of playing group.

Again, I personally don't require a system at all with a single player or as a single player. With a group, it's my personal preference that I limit ability, not points. I've seen disparagements as far as 130 points and the players fully happy all the way around. Experience is unnecessary since if a character needs an enhancement then I, as the GM, can find a way to get it to them in the course of the game. Disads become what they are meant to be, conception fulfillers, and not just a means to get more points. With the points being thrown out the window, suddenly, the important thing becomes the character conception, motivation and action, rather than the system mechanics or biases/flaws themselves.

 

This is all opinion, and my own experience I'm sputtering out here. Your mileage may (and probably does) vary...

[Starlord]

Re: Arguments for Arguments sake...

 

Originally posted by Shaun Hendricks

You guys do realize you are debating make-believe characters, which rely on a great deal of personal perception as to abilities and capabilities, as well as rules to a system which seem to be flavored by the 'author of the moment' and some built in flaws that spawn massive amounts of house rules in many gaming groups.

 

As I said before to debate actual stats/abilities for characters you need a baseline or set of ground rules, which just happens to be the established Champions characters. To be fair, I don't think everyone here was specifically arguing character stats. They were using established characters to try to show different concepts at different power levels and different types of game play.

 

Originally posted by Shaun Hendricks

Is it REALLY worth it to start sniping at each other and making this personal? Dunno about you guys but I'd rather have a bunch of friends with the sytem in common than enemies made by getting technical or devisive.

 

Just some food for thought...

 

You are correct here.

[Starlord]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Interesting...

 

Originally posted by Shaun Hendricks

On the surface, that 'seems' to be the case, however, my group have discovered major flaws with the 'total points' acting as a balancer. This doesn't come out as much in playing Super Heroes as it does in other genres, since the Hero System was primarilly designed for Super Heroes.

 

snip...

 

Ah. See, being in the Champions forum I always assume that we're referring to the Supers genre.

 

I never encountered any major problems playing without limits in all my years playing HERO in the supers genre. However, at lower point totals I COMPLETELY agree with you. While I have far less experience playing Fantasy HERO, we did find that strict AP, CV, PD, ED, etc., limits had to be set. My experience is the system starts breaking down around the 200 point and under level. Of course, maybe others had different problems.

[Trebuchet]

Originally posted by Starlord

Now metagame-wise, we all agreed to have our schtick and noone was allowed to infringe too much on that. The MA never came too close to the speedster who never infringed on the 'weird powers' guy who never infringed on the straight 'energy projector', etc.

This is exactly how our group does it. Concept and schtick are more important than CVs, defenses or damage dice. The players communicate amongst themselves to avoid stepping on another player's toes. In our campaign, CVs vary from 8 to 15, defenses spread from 12 PD to 34, and SPDs go from 4 to 9. Trust me, nobody feels unimportant or useless if it's being done right.

 

We also look for ways to make each other look good in combat, rather than trying to outshine the other characters. When 5 or 6 players are all trying to help each other do cool things, everybody has fun. And it leads to a powerful sense of camaraderie and teamwork that has to be experienced to be believed.