EOCV vs DCV

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

I would make it a +1/2 advantage for the simple reason that it is cheaper to raise your EGO than your DEX.

Only if you let your SPD round down...

 

(See above)

[Sean Waters]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

For what it is worth, if ALL you wanted to do was base your OCV on EGO rather than DEX, I'd let it go as a +0, unless there was some overiding consideration related to the game worlds not to (for instance if DEX was limited to 20 but EGO wan't).

 

I don't see it makes a lot of difference in cost or effect. If your GM wants an advantage applied, consider instead just buying 2 point skill levels with EB OCV to bring your OCV up to what you EOCV would be and just say it is because you are targetting with your mind: probably cheaper than the advantage route, if a little odd when characteristics get drained....

 

It IS a normal EB, it is just targetted with your mind: I'd say that is colour and texture, not a major change EVEN IF your Ego is higher than your DEX: Hero is not a game where you'll get away with having a low DEX for long unless you have really impressive defences.

 

Obviously if you want it invisible and LOS ranged, that is a different matter

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Well, LOS ranged would be icing on the cake, but really I'm just trying to use my EOCV instead of OCV since the idea is the characters force of mind is targeting and not their hand-eye coordination like normal. Of course - Line Of Sight is a +1/2 Advantage is probably what I'm really looking at advantage wise. And I'm cool with that.

 

I'm more concerned with being true to concept then saving points anywhere. but I'm crazy like that.

[Sean Waters]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Well, LOS ranged would be icing on the cake, but really I'm just trying to use my EOCV instead of OCV since the idea is the characters force of mind is targeting and not their hand-eye coordination like normal. Of course - Line Of Sight is a +1/2 Advantage is probably what I'm really looking at advantage wise. And I'm cool with that.

 

I'm more concerned with being true to concept then saving points anywhere. but I'm crazy like that.

 

Attacking EDCV IS a real advantage in most games, so hitting DCV rather than EDCV is a limitation. Let us consider average DEX and EGO. I'd estimate most superhero games have DEX average around 23 and EGO around 15. I could be off: depends on the game SO DCV averages 8 and EDCV averages 5 (plus you can boost DCV with combat manoeuvres like dodge), so it sounds like a -1/2.

 

You could build it like this:

 

Ego Attack (does BODY -1)) targetted against DCV not EDCV (-1/2) and effected by normal defences not mental defence (I'd say -1/2 in most games but the BOECV advantage write up makes it a lot less!)

 

SO (in my world) for 10 real points (20 active) you could have an Ego Attack that does abody and applies against DCV and normal defences, is not normally visible and has LOS range.

 

That is the same cost as a normal EB that is BOECV and attacks mental defences and EDCV but is visible and has limited range. Sounds fair.

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

I'd actually consider making it a slight Limitation on top of BOECV, since mentalists usually get the drop on non-mentalists by working against their (relatively) low Egos, but it is probably easiest to just make it a +/-0.

 

BTW, we have broached this subject before in this forum. I can't remember in which thread, though. You might try some searches (probably for TK and BOECV). Sorry, but I'm too lazy to do it myself ATM.

[Silbeg]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Running a search should pull up some old "Ego vs DEX" threads. They tended to lean the same way as this discussion' date=' that swapping between EGO and DEX was either a wash (+/-0) or a minor advantage.[/quote']

I'd actually consider making it a slight Limitation on top of BOECV' date=' since mentalists usually get the drop on non-mentalists by working against their (relatively) low Egos, but it is probably easiest to just make it a +/-0.[/quote']

Having had this discussion with a couple of my players, we tended to agree that the ability to do something outside of the norm (such as swapping to OECV) should be more difficult than the norm (and thus be an advantage). This is because it allows you to tailor your character, min-maxing more. We figured it would be a +1/4, most likely. The other things, like Line of Sight (which already is a +1/2, right?), etc., would eventually add up to the BOECV.

 

There is a precendence, though, in Psychokinesis (Tk BOECV). Specifically in the rules for Tk, it states that taking BOECV makes it a OECV vs DCV contest. We thought that perhaps this probably should have been a 1/4 less of an advantage than BOECV. However, since Psychokinesis does allow BODY to be inflicted, maybe the answer is to say if a power does BODY, then it is vs DCV (without the additional +1 Does Body advantage), else it is vs. DECV.

 

We seemed to think this made some sense.

[Sean Waters]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Personally I think that BOECV is too expensive applied to TK. It SHOULD really be +3/4 as it applies v normal defences, but even so, for what it does (adds LOS range, allows you to use EOCV instead of OCV and makes the power visible to mental senses) doesn't seem worth it.

 

I mean, that is another 30 points on a 40 point power. Buy No range modifier and +5 OCV levels, why dontcha?

 

I do accept what Silberg says about custom advantages meaning you can minimax individuals (a very good point, actually), although that doesn't bother me too much with this one, and I'm not terribly generous when it comes to point breaks. If all you want it for is a better chance to hit there are much cheaper ways to accomplish it (see above), so I see it as more a flavour power: it is not as if you can simply say 'well, I don't need to spend points on DEX now'.

 

Mind you this is abuseable (what isn't), but I'd be far more worried if the power was trying to target EDCV.

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

If I wanted that I'd do a simple Ego Blast ...

 

Maybe I'm looking at a variant of Ego Attack; Does BODY; Based on CON where I use EOCV instead of OCV.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Having had this discussion with a couple of my players' date=' we tended to agree that the ability to do something outside of the norm (such as swapping to OECV) [i']should[/i] be more difficult than the norm (and thus be an advantage). This is because it allows you to tailor your character, min-maxing more. We figured it would be a +1/4, most likely.

I'm sorry, but I have a serious problem with this idea. In HERO you should pay for utility, not for creativity. If some wierd, unusual construct is no more powerful than the standard construct, it shouldn't cost more just for being wierd and unusual.

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

I'm sorry' date=' but I have a serious problem with this idea. In HERO you should pay for utility, not for creativity. If some wierd, unusual construct is no more powerful than the standard construct, it shouldn't cost more just for being wierd and unusual.[/quote']

So AVLD vs., say, all Power Defense should be free? After all, it may be somewhat unusual for attacks (damaging Attack Powers, that is) to work against Power Defense, but Power Defense costs the same amount as PD and ED.

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

So AVLD vs.' date=' say, all Power Defense should be free? After all, it may be somewhat unusual for attacks to work against Power Defense, but it costs the same amount as PD and ED.[/quote']

Point well made...

 

however, I think it was in reference that "outside the norm" infered something not directly addressed by the rules or a build not already available.

 

Me - I think it is an advantage to switch out EOCV for OCV, but not as much as an advantage as it is to switch out everything like BOECV does now.

[Sean Waters]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

So AVLD vs.' date=' say, all Power Defense should be free? After all, it may be somewhat unusual for attacks (damaging Attack Powers, that is) to work against Power Defense, but Power Defense costs the same amount as PD and ED.[/quote']

 

An excellent example of the dichotomy of cost v actual useage. Everyone has pd and ed, not everyone has powd, but everyone could (if the game world allowed it) and it wouldn't cost any more than normal defences. Even when you DO buy powd though, it tends to be at lower levels as the cost of drain is at lest twice that of EB, so you are never going to need as much. Compared to the cost of the relevant attack, powd is much cheaper than pd or ed, and yet we still buy less.

 

Points balancing is not simply a matter of matching utility but also of applying the costs in practice to the game world. This is where we tend to run into problems as every game world is different, but we muddle through somehow

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

 

I find this an especially ugly area. An Ego Blast can reasonably be reconstructed as a BOECV (+1) Invisible to 2 sense groups (+3/4) Line of Sight (+1/2) Energy Blast. It now costs 16.25 points per die and still doesn't grant Mental Awareness.

 

[Do you get LOS with BOECV? Then it would be 13.75 points per die]

 

It costs you 12.5 points per die to have an AVLD - EGO Defense EB, and it doesn't get any of the other benefits of BoECV.

 

Extrapolating this backwards, maybe basing a power on OECV vs DECV is actually costed as a limitation. There's something to that if most of your opponents will use attacks based on DEX, so buying up your Ego to enhance your OCV won't reduce the odds of your typical opponent hitting you with his attacks, I suppose.

 

I'm inclined to agree with Phil. Is the fact that the character targets with ECV rather than regular OCV, in general, a sufficient advantage (or drawback) that the cost should be varied? I don't believe it is.

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

You do get LOS with BOECV, so it's 13.75

 

On the other hand if we construct it along the lines of:

 

Ego Attack; Does Body; PD Applies

 

It still costs 10pts/D6, but now the Body counts like an EB and the defender applies both their Mental and Physical Def against it.

 

So for a few points less on the cost of the attack (vs your EB construct) you're against their DECV (which is usually less so you hit more often) but they apply two forms of def against the attack (which may or may not be relevent as MD isn't very common).

 

And with either one you still can't attack objects without a mind (such as doors and walls or some automatons).

 

So how do you construct a Mental Attack (EOCV) that can affect the physical world like a normal attack and work against even mindless things?

 

Simply buying an EB, stating it's Mental SFX and buying any CSLs to make your OCV match EOCV with that attack seems very clunky. Though definitely doable, I just think we can come up with a more elegant solution.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

So how do you construct a Mental Attack (EOCV) that can affect the physical world like a normal attack and work against even mindless things?

 

Simply buying an EB, stating it's Mental SFX and buying any CSLs to make your OCV match EOCV with that attack seems very clunky. Though definitely doable, I just think we can come up with a more elegant solution.

We can. Buy an EB. State that it's Mental SFX. Give it a +0 Advantage. (Or a -0 Limitation, if you want to get tricky.) Call it "EGO Link" or something.

 

It allows you to use the EB at your EGO in the Combat Order, and calculate your base OCV with that EB as EGO/3 instead of DEX/3. All other aspects of the Power remain unchanged. (Still targets your opponent's DCV, still works against their ED (or PD, etc.), still has normal range, still has normal range modifiers, etc.)

 

All done.

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

We can. Buy an EB. State that it's Mental SFX. Give it a +0 Advantage. (Or a -0 Limitation, if you want to get tricky.) Call it "EGO Link" or something.

 

It allows you to use the EB at your EGO in the Combat Order, and calculate your base OCV with that EB as EGO/3 instead of DEX/3. All other aspects of the Power remain unchanged. (Still targets your opponent's DCV, still works against their ED (or PD, etc.), still has normal range, still has normal range modifiers, etc.)

 

All done.

I think that's where I'm going ... towards asking the question: Is switching out the OCV to EOCV worth anything or simply a +0 Advantage based on the GM allowing it in their game?

 

you say yes, a lot of people say yes. I'm half convinced.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

I think that's where I'm going ... towards asking the question: Is switching out the OCV to EOCV worth anything or simply a +0 Advantage based on the GM allowing it in their game?

 

you say yes, a lot of people say yes. I'm half convinced.

So turn it around and argue the other side. Try and explain to me why it should cost anything, and I'll see if I can shoot down your arguments.

 

The rationale that this effect should cost something because DEX costs more than EGO has been shown not to hold much (if any) water, because part of the cost of DEX is actually paying for SPD. Once you include SPD in the picture, DEX and EGO end up costing the same (unless the character's SPD is both left at its figured value, and allowed to "lose" fractional points... which almost never happens).

 

Is there any other reason why one might argue this effect should cost something?

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Well ...

 

nevermind, I just shot down all my own arguements before I even typed them.

 

The only thing that comes to mind is that doing something out of the norm might, possibly should, cost you points just because it's out of the norm. And that's not a good reason.

 

Guess I'll have to see if my GM agrees that it's a +0 Advantage.

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

The only thing that comes to mind is that doing something out of the norm might' date=' possibly should, cost you points just because it's out of the norm. And that's not a good reason.[/quote']

I think it is a good reason. Part of creating a character is trying to predict attacks and design defenses appropriately. The more oddball an attack the less likely an opponent will have planned for it in their defensive strategy. Thus unusual mechanics are likely to be more effective due only to their unusualness.

 

-- The Gamist in Prestidigitator's Head

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

I think it is a good reason. Part of creating a character is trying to predict attacks and design defenses appropriately. The more oddball an attack the less likely an opponent will have planned for it in their defensive strategy. Thus unusual mechanics are likely to be more effective due only to their unusualness.

 

-- The Gamist in Prestidigitator's Head

Edit: no wait ... that arguement works if you're switching up the Defences you're working against.

 

I'm switching out the other end - I'm not changing their planning - they still need to plan for DCV and normal PD. So I'm really not presenting an oddball attack, just an oddball way of delivering the attack.

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Edit: no wait ... that arguement works if you're switching up the Defences you're working against.

 

I'm switching out the other end - I'm not changing their planning - they still need to plan for DCV and normal PD. So I'm really not presenting an oddball attack, just an oddball way of delivering the attack.

When I used the term, "defense," (not capitalized, mind), I meant all aspects of a character geared towards keeping that character from harm, not just Defense Powers. I would include DCV and DECV, as well as Desolidification, Defense Maneuver, and maybe even Flight.

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

When I used the term' date=' "defense," (not capitalized, mind), I meant all aspects of a character geared towards keeping that character from harm, not just Defense Powers. I would include DCV and DECV, as well as Desolidification, Defense Maneuver, and maybe even Flight. [/quote']

I would agree completely.

 

Though I'm trying to switch OCV and EOCV out. Not DCV and DECV.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Is there any other reason why one might argue this effect should cost something?

OK, try this one on for size:

 

The question isn't whether EGO is cheaper than DEX; the question is whether it's cheaper to buy up one of them or both of them. (That part is meant to be rhetorical.)

 

In this case, it sounds like the character has primarily EGO-based attacks; I assume he/she has a high EGO, and probably a lower DEX. Because of the limitations of standard mental powers (can't blast doors, robots, etc), you want to add another power that does physical/energy damage. Perfectly reasonable: no problem so far.

 

But using a standard energy blast effectively would require that you either buy up your DEX to match your EGO, or buy some CSLs to compensate. Instead you want to use your ECV to target the attack; you want to have it both ways. Mind you: I'm not saying that's a bad thing! It's a creative idea and I agree that creativity should not be punished. But IMO it outta cost something to compensate for the extra DEX +/or CSLs that you avoided having to buy.

 

Turn it around: a brick wants to buy an EGO Attack so he can have something with LOS and all the other advantages of mental powers. But because his ECV is so low, he wants to be able to use his OCV to target it. Fine (assuming it fits the character, etc), but it's an advantage to the character and therefore should cost points, if only in the interest of maintaining balance.

 

As far as how much it should cost, I could argue it anywhere from +1/4 to +3/4 depending on the campaign.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"You can get more with a kind word and a two-by-four than you can with just a kind word."

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

OK, try this one on for size:

 

The question isn't whether EGO is cheaper than DEX; the question is whether it's cheaper to buy up one of them or both of them. (That part is meant to be rhetorical.)

 

In this case, it sounds like the character has primarily EGO-based attacks; I assume he/she has a high EGO, and probably a lower DEX. Because of the limitations of standard mental powers (can't blast doors, robots, etc), you want to add another power that does physical/energy damage. Perfectly reasonable: no problem so far.

 

But using a standard energy blast effectively would require that you either buy up your DEX to match your EGO, or buy some CSLs to compensate. Instead you want to use your ECV to target the attack; you want to have it both ways. Mind you: I'm not saying that's a bad thing! It's a creative idea and I agree that creativity should not be punished. But IMO it outta cost something to compensate for the extra DEX +/or CSLs that you avoided having to buy.

 

Turn it around: a brick wants to buy an EGO Attack so he can have something with LOS and all the other advantages of mental powers. But because his ECV is so low, he wants to be able to use his OCV to target it. Fine (assuming it fits the character, etc), but it's an advantage to the character and therefore should cost points, if only in the interest of maintaining balance.

 

As far as how much it should cost, I could argue it anywhere from +1/4 to +3/4 depending on the campaign.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"You can get more with a kind word and a two-by-four than you can with just a kind word."

I suppose the big question is - how much is it worth in you campaign? and does basing it off EOCV add LOS by default?

 

Of course - I think it an interesting idea that the only switched out is the OCV used, the power otherwise acts normally (Range Mods, DCV, PD/ED, Visibility...).

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

I would agree completely.

 

Though I'm trying to switch OCV and EOCV out. Not DCV and DECV.

Oh! Right. Sorry.

 

Why not just use the LOS Range Modifier then? If your ECV is higher than your CV, add some 2-point CSLs into the mix. What's the difference? Anything that can't be handled by SFX and dramatic sense on the fly?