EOCV vs DCV

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

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?

Well, I find that solution oddly clunky. Though it is a completely valid solution in every way possible.

 

Assuming I change my DEX w/o changing my EGO I now have the possibility of the EB w/ CSLs being at a higher OCV than normal mental attacks.

 

Unless of course I can remove a CSL and add its points into the DEX increase (assuming the DEX increase changes the OCV) so the CVs all stay the same.

 

It's just a kind of weird disconnect I see that to get what I want I have to sort of sidestep and go from the other side so it just Looks like the same thing instead of Being the same thing.

 

In the end, I'm cool with either solution - I just find it odd the System didn't account for this situation.

[PhilFleischmann]

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']

Where do you get that from what I said? If an AVLD vs Power Defense is more useful than a normal attack, then it should cost more. The point is that the reason is because of its *utility*, not it's being *unusual*.

 

It would be rather unusual, but possible, in some campaign for the average character to have as much Power Def as PD or ED. In this case, an AVLD is no more useful than an attack vs PD or ED, so in that rather unusual circumstance, AVLD should be free.

 

Now I've never seen a game where the typical character had PowD=PD or ED, so in all the cases I've seen, yes AVLD is a significant advantage.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

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...).

Well, buying it as straight BOECV does include LOS by default, right? That's one reason it's so expensive. (HD lists a -1/4 "Range Modifiers Apply" adder for BOECV.)

 

If switching from OCV to ECV is the only thing you're switching, I'd probably lean towards +1/4. Significantly cheaper than buying up your DEX, but that's your reward for thinking outside the box. If you wanted to also add LOS... well, buying LOS by itself is a +1/2 adv, so that puts you back up to +3/4. Really, the only things you've left out of the package are:

• It targets DCV instead of DECV (not much of an advantage in most campaigns), and
  
• It affects standard defenses (which is a free option for BOECV).
  
• It's still visible to normal vision unless you buy that off.
  

Not trying to rain on your parade g-s. It's still a cool idea. I just think it's an advantage and should be paid for accordingly.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"Hell I dunno, if I wanted schoolin' I'd have gone to school."

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

• It's still visible to normal vision unless you buy that off.

Well that part isn't left off the BOECV package. BOECV doesn't affect the visibility of the Base Power.

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Where do you get that from what I said? If an AVLD vs Power Defense is more useful than a normal attack' date=' then it should cost more. The point is that the reason is because of its *utility*, not it's being *unusual*.[/quote']

It only has higher utility because, as you mention, Power Def tends to be lower than PD/ED. Power Def only tends to be lower because of the unusualness of attacks such as this working against it. Therefore, AVLD makes a Power more expensive simply because it makes the attack more unusual. It really comes down to an expectation thing again. The more usual an attack the more likely a target will have defenses to account for it, and the less effective the attack generally is going to be.

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Well' date=' buying it as straight BOECV [u']does[/u] include LOS by default, right? That's one reason it's so expensive. (HD lists a -1/4 "Range Modifiers Apply" adder for BOECV.)

 

If switching from OCV to ECV is the only thing you're switching, I'd probably lean towards +1/4. Significantly cheaper than buying up your DEX, but that's your reward for thinking outside the box. If you wanted to also add LOS... well, buying LOS by itself is a +1/2 adv, so that puts you back up to +3/4. Really, the only things you've left out of the package are:

• It targets DCV instead of DECV (not much of an advantage in most campaigns), and
  
• It affects standard defenses (which is a free option for BOECV).
  
• It's still visible to normal vision unless you buy that off.
  

Not trying to rain on your parade g-s. It's still a cool idea. I just think it's an advantage and should be paid for accordingly.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"Hell I dunno, if I wanted schoolin' I'd have gone to school."

Hey, I'm a fence sitter on this one .. I see where it doesn't matter and I see where it is an advantage.

 

I'm pretty sure that switching out OCV to EOCV is worth +1/4 Advantage myself and am perfectly happy there.

 

And as I think more about the power it makes sense to leave the Range Mods on. Based on the idea that hitting a mind is one thing - once you have the mind locked on (as it were) it's easy to hit, but once you switch to hitting a body it becoms a whole different concept.

 

So here is what will be the most likely final build submitted:

 

Energy Blast; Targetted with EOCV +1/4

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

It only has higher utility because' date=' as you mention, Power Def tends to be lower than PD/ED. Power Def only tends to be lower because of the unusualness of attacks such as this working against it. Therefore, AVLD makes a Power more expensive simply because it makes the attack more unusual. It really comes down to an expectation thing again. The more usual an attack the more likely a target will have defenses to account for it, and the less effective the attack generally is going to be.[/quote']

Are you arguing just for the sake of arguing? Or do you honestly not understand my point? This isn't brain surgery, is it?

 

More useful + unusual = more expensive

More useful + normal = more expensive

Less useful + normal = less expensive

Less useful + unusual = less expensive

 

Note that it's the useful part that determimes the above equations, the normal/unusual axis doesn't have any effect on the price. Do you disagree with that?

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Are you arguing just for the sake of arguing? Or do you honestly not understand my point? This isn't brain surgery, is it?

 

More useful + unusual = more expensive

More useful + normal = more expensive

Less useful + normal = less expensive

Less useful + unusual = less expensive

 

Note that it's the useful part that determimes the above equations, the normal/unusual axis doesn't have any effect on the price. Do you disagree with that?

I disagree that they are independant variables. Is it reasonable to assume a modification of, "usualness," alone that does not affect, "usefulness?" Most of the time I think not.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Well that part isn't left off the BOECV package. BOECV doesn't affect the visibility of the Base Power.

Yes, that's what I meant. I just wrote it wrong.

 

 

bigdamnhero

"Mercy is the mark of a great man. [stab] Guess I'm just a good man. [stab] Well, I'm okay."

[Sean Waters]

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."

 

 

Agreed, BUT....I think you would (in anything like a normal game) have to either buy up DEX/defences to survive OR make full use of that LOS range and stay the hell out of combat. That is not going to work for long.

 

A character with a deficient DEX is seriously limtied in most Hero games. That is a limtiation in itself, in practice.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Agreed, BUT....I think you would (in anything like a normal game) have to either buy up DEX/defences to survive OR make full use of that LOS range and stay the hell out of combat. That is not going to work for long.

 

A character with a deficient DEX is seriously limtied in most Hero games. That is a limtiation in itself, in practice.

Also a fair point.

 

bigdamnhero

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

Agreed, BUT....I think you would (in anything like a normal game) have to either buy up DEX/defences to survive OR make full use of that LOS range and stay the hell out of combat. That is not going to work for long.

 

A character with a deficient DEX is seriously limtied in most Hero games. That is a limtiation in itself, in practice.

 

This is very true. Even if a player can choose to base OCV off of either DEX or EGO, there are still very different results to buying up one stat or the other.

 

No one gets upset that resistantce to PRE attacks can be raised by buying up Ego or PRE, or that the two don't stack. If I want to enhance REC, I can buy it straight, buy up CON or buy up STR, each with different results (and costs).

 

I don't think there would be a real shift to game balance if powers could freely shift from DEX-based OCV to EGo based OCV depending on the SFX of the power.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

I disagree that they are independant variables. Is it reasonable to assume a modification of' date=' "usualness," alone that does not affect, "usefulness?" Most of the time I think not.[/quote']

I never said they were independant variables. I agree that they aren't. But they are *different* variables; there is some correlation, but not 100%. Regardless of any amount of correlation, it's the usefulness that should determine price, not the unusualness.

[prestidigitator]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

I never said they were independant variables. I agree that they aren't. But they are *different* variables; there is some correlation' date=' but not 100%. Regardless of any amount of correlation, it's the usefulness that should determine price, not the unusualness.[/quote']

Ah. I think we were arguing over a moot point then; a matter of wording rather than intent. Sorry about that.

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

This is very true. Even if a player can choose to base OCV off of either DEX or EGO, there are still very different results to buying up one stat or the other.

 

No one gets upset that resistantce to PRE attacks can be raised by buying up Ego or PRE, or that the two don't stack. If I want to enhance REC, I can buy it straight, buy up CON or buy up STR, each with different results (and costs).

 

I don't think there would be a real shift to game balance if powers could freely shift from DEX-based OCV to EGo based OCV depending on the SFX of the power.

One of the things it would allow for is extreme customization, possibly leading to far too much min/maxing if one were allowed to simply shift OCVs around.

 

Given that most characters will want to maintain a decent ability to not get smacked around in combat and wanting decent offensive capability..

 

one could simply buy up DEX to get both at once, traditional and worthy method. But for those who are playing a Mentalist Archetype they also need to buy up EGO to a higher degree than normal ... thus placing points into two Characteristics for what they want.

 

Moving powers to EOCV could allow for a lower DEX Score if all they really need is the offensive CV to be high - thus saving many points. To keep their DCV high they simply need to buy DCV Skill Levels, at 5pt/+1. Then you need to factor in SPD as well... hrm. I need numbers.

 

Standard Method to get high CVs in both:

DEX 21 (7 CV; 33pts)

EGO 21 (7 CV; 22pts)

SPD 6 (29pts)

=84pts

 

Assuming one can freely assign Offensive CVs, using lower DEX:

DEX 12 (4 CV; 6pts)

EGO 21 (7 CV; 22pts)

SPD 6 (38pts)

+3 DCV Levels (7 DCV; 15pts)

=73pts

 

Saving 11pts on a character who really only needs a high EOCV, not OCV but still wants a high DCV and a SPD6.

 

With a 12DC Attack:

normally 60AP/RP (no other advantages/limitations withstanding)

Assuming +1/4 to switch to EOCV: 75AP/RP (+15pts) [Alternately if you're using an AP Cap and not a DC Cap you end up with a 9-10DC Attack with that Advantage, depending on GM Flexibility to exceed the AP Cap by 2pts.]

 

Adding 15 pts to the Second Example yields a higher cost by 4 Points over the normal attacker. Not completely unreasonable really.

 

I think a +1/4 Advantage is fair enough to be able to switch Offensive CVs from DEX to EGO. I can certainly see, where in games that both high DEX and/or EGO can be expected on any given character and not one or the other as in most games, that switching between the two would be a simple +0 Advantage.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

One of the things it would allow for is extreme customization

 

Isn't customization what the Hero point based system is all about?

 

possibly leading to far too much min/maxing if one were allowed to simply shift OCVs around.

 

I'm not sure we get to an excess with this one item. Not to the extent other, book-legal, min-maxing abilities that are available, I think.

 

Given that most characters will want to maintain a decent ability to not get smacked around in combat and wanting decent offensive capability..

 

one could simply buy up DEX to get both at once, traditional and worthy method. But for those who are playing a Mentalist Archetype they also need to buy up EGO to a higher degree than normal ... thus placing points into two Characteristics for what they want.

 

Is this a feature, or a flaw in that the Mentalist archetype has to pay for two OCV's where everyone else only pays for one? Remembering, of course, that Telekinesis is a classic Mentalist power, and defaults to DEX-based OCV.

 

Moving powers to EOCV could allow for a lower DEX Score if all they really need is the offensive CV to be high - thus saving many points. To keep their DCV high they simply need to buy DCV Skill Levels' date=' at 5pt/+1. Then you need to factor in SPD as well... hrm. I need numbers.[/quote']

 

Well, the numbers are pretty easy as I see it. The character effectively saves 2 character points for every point he reduced his DEX by. The third point goes to SPD. So he saves 6 points for every 3 points he reduced his DEX by. If he buys +1 DCV for every 3 points of reduced DEX, he saves 1 point per 3 DEX. Of course, he doesn't get the benefits of enhanced DEX rolls, either, does he? He also loses the benefits of moving first if he wishes to use any physical ability such as movement or, arguably, dodging with those DCV levels. He can probably come up with mental SFX for the "moving first" issue, so he'll be looking at loss of DEX rolls.

 

Standard Method to get high CVs in both:

DEX 21 (7 CV; 33pts)

EGO 21 (7 CV; 22pts)

SPD 6 (29pts)

=84pts

 

Assuming one can freely assign Offensive CVs, using lower DEX:

DEX 12 (4 CV; 6pts)

EGO 21 (7 CV; 22pts)

SPD 6 (38pts)

+3 DCV Levels (7 DCV; 15pts)

=73pts

 

Saving 11pts on a character who really only needs a high EOCV, not OCV but still wants a high DCV and a SPD6.

 

6 + 22 +38 +15 = 81, not 73, so he only saved 3 points, in accordance with my math above. Glad I did it before reading your example closely.

 

That seriously changes the balance on your discussion of an advantage which follows. Assuming +1/4 on a 60 AP power, he spends an extra 12 points. Given he could not buy +2 to all DEX rolls for 3 points, I'm thinking allowing a free shift has not caused any point imbalance in the example you have given.

 

Mind you, I haven't considered the opposite approach of shifting a mental power to a DEX based OCV. I can't think of any great SFX examples for that, however, whereas a lot of "physical attack directed mentally" examples seem reasonable.

[ghost-angel]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

How the hell did my calculator mess that one up?

 

sigh.

 

God points all. I guess it really is mostly a game by game basis of choice. We went with a +1/4 Advantage, we'll see how it works out.

[Sean Waters]

Re: EOCV vs DCV

 

The 'extreme customisation' point is a good one, GA, but it already exists in game: Microwave Mole has life support, N-Ray vision, tunelling and an indirect EB: a particular set of powers that are incredibly difficult to counter, without a specific counter-build. Less useful v fliers, I'll give you, but still nasty.

 

I don't think we can escape the possibilty that power combinations are going to be taken advantage of. By and large I don't mind this. In fact I often take advantage of it as a GM: most 'specific builds' have weaknesses - the Microwave Mole probably has not got high defences as he never needs them, so all you need to do is get to him: the game then becomes more about applying logic and creative thought rather than just butting heads.