RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

[stan da ork]

Okay, I realize this will probably open a whole can of worms that I don't really want to open, but an idea just popped into my head literally out of nowhere about three minutes ago, and I want to get some feedback on it.

 

I'm sure lots of people think about the cost of STR at some point, since it really is the best deal in HERO. If you compare two characters that are identical except for one bought 60 STR and the other bought a 12d6 EB, here's what I can see:

 

1) STR Guy spent less points, not only since he got 10 STR for free, but also because he got a bunch of figured characteristics that EB Guy didn't get.

 

2) STR Guy can use his extra STR to perform lots of combat manuvers that EB Guy can't use his EB for. Additionally, STR Guy can wield big objects as impromptu AoE attacks, and pick stuff up and throw it if he's really hurting for a ranged attack.

 

3) EB Guy always has a ranged attack, and can spread or bounce it. Note that STR Guy may be able to throw a large object as an AoE attack, which is arguably better than spreading.

 

This looks pretty lopsided in favor of STR Guy. Now, I know that some people's "fix" is to either charge 1.5 (or 2) points per point of STR, or to get rid of figured characteristics. Here is my less-extreme idea:

 

After a character buys his STR, he pays an additional number of points equal to his STR / 5. This only applies if the character spends points on STR (thus a character who keeps a 10 STR doesn't pay anything extra). If the character buys some STR as a Power, the STR added by that power is included in this extra cost. These extra points are outside of any Characteristic or Power, and as such are not affected by any Advantages or Limitations. Some examples:

 

Albert buys a STR of 60. He pays 50 points for the STR, plus (60 / 5 = 12) additional points, for a total of 62 points.

 

Bob leaves his STR at 10. He pays 0 points.

 

Carl buys a STR of 30, then buys 0 END for his STR. He pays 20 points for the STR, plus (30 * 0.5 = 15) for the Advantage, plus (30 / 5 = 6) additional points, for a total of 41 points.

 

Darren buys a STR of 20, then buys 20 more STR through an OAF. He pays 10 points for the natural STR, plus (20 / 2 = 10) for the Limited STR, plus (40 / 5 = 8) additional points, for a total of 28 points.

 

This brings the cost of STR closer to the cost of a similar point-value Multipower. The normal STR cost mirrors the Reserve, and the extra point cost mirrors the Slots.

 

The implications of this change are as follows:

 

1) Bricks become slightly more expensive. However, an additional 12 points for a 60 STR Brick is hardly prohibitive, and certainly does not nerf the character type.

 

2) It discourages characters from casually buying a few points of STR, since the first 5 STR effectively cost 8 points, and the first 10 effectively cost 14. This could hurt Heroic games, but note that the rule is aimed at Superheroic games.

 

3) This removes the need for the "Hand-to-Hand Attack" Limitation on HA's, since an HA is now cheaper than STR. This means that the two Normal damage attack powers could mirror the two Killing damage attack powers, instead of HA being much cheaper than EB.

 

So what do people think? Is this a good idea? Does it bring Bricks more into line with other character types? Would it help keep all characters from buying a 15 or 20 STR just for the figured characteristics, even when that makes no sense (maybe this is only a problem to me, but I see an awful lot of characters with a 15 or 20 STR that shouldn't have it)? Or should I just shut up and leave things be?

[MitchellS]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

You're forgetting that non-STR guy can buy his EB and FF in an EC, effectively making them cost half price. Also, EB guy can still use his EBs in melee, whereas STR guy needs an object to be able to use his STR at range, and then is limited to damage based up on the DEF value of what he threw. There is also no reason that EB guy can't have a higher-than-normal STR as well, and thus gain some of the benefit that STR guy gets.

 

I think changing the cost of STR is fine for non-superheroic genres [at least the ones which don't allow power frameworks] but to my mind the different types of characters are balanced in superhero games.

[Dust Raven]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

I've said it lots of times. The cost of STR is fine and fair and balanced. The "problem" people see is that STR is more easily abused than an EB.

 

As far as cost comparison, it reall comes down to the advantage of Ranged. It is not to be understimated. Sure, STR can pick up and hurl a handy object as an impromptu ranged attack, but check out the penalties. The damage is restricted by the object. Also, most objects are not built for accurate throwing, giving the thrower penalties (and a -4 is LOT). Yep, there's that possibility of tossing something for an AE attack, but again you're limited by the amount of damage you can do and accuracy. The larger an object is, the less is has to weigh, and the less DEF+BODY it's likely to have.

 

With an EB, you just point and shoot and never have to worry about damage or accuracy. If you want to hit multiple targets, you Spread. If you want a more accurate shot, you Spread or Bounce. You also aren't dependant upon an object for your ranged attack (by default). You always have it, and it can't be shot out of our hands or destroyed before you get it, nor it is destroyed upon using it.

 

In Heroic games this is even more of a blur. No one pays for an EB or other Powers in a Heroic game (well, rarely, there are those heavily fantasy wizards and the like). The only thing you really have to compare STR with is other Characterstics and Skills. I'm confused how anyone can say the cost too low when they don't have anything that compares to it at that level.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

I agree with Dust Raven that the cost of STR is balanced vs. an EB. Even though both essentially cost 5 pts per DC, EB gives you range and STR gives you benefit in Figured CHA. The combat versatility is about the same in my eyes. I have never played in a game where a brick could hold a candle to an energy projector at range because they simply run out of suitable stuff to throw, especially if you are a hero and worried about collateral damage. But the brick can perform Grab manuvers and can pull a bus back onto a bridge, and so gets some "free" abilities that the energy projector would have to pay for separately (although MitchellS point about power frameworks is true and may make this trivial).

 

If you asked me, the CHA that has a cost problem is CON, which has less utility than STR in my eyes but costs twice as much. But that is another topic.

 

_____________________________________________________

"I don't want to stop crime. I just want to fight it." - Tick

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

As far as cost comparison' date=' it reall comes down to the advantage of Ranged. It is not to be understimated. Sure, STR can pick up and hurl a handy object as an impromptu ranged attack, but check out the penalties. The damage is restricted by the object. Also, most objects are not built for accurate throwing, giving the thrower penalties (and a -4 is LOT).[/quote']

 

For anyone who thinks -4 doesn't go far enough to leveling the playing field, consider this. A character is supposed to pay for Weapon Familiarity or suffer a -3 non-proficiency penalty with weapons. In Supers games, this is commonly ignored, but the actual rule is that you don't have to buy the skill to use a weapon you paid points for. That Brisk probably doesn't have WF: Tree, does he?

 

With an EB' date=' you just point and shoot and never have to worry about damage or accuracy. If you want to hit multiple targets, you Spread. If you want a more accurate shot, you Spread or Bounce.[/quote']

 

This is key. In games where STR is viewed as underpriced, I wonder if the heroes ever encounter very difficuklt (ie high DCV) targets, where Spreadi ng would level the playing field. And the Brick also has to take down those agents one at a time, since he can't Spread his punch. It's amazing how a variety of different challenges can allow each hero's strengths (and weaknesses) to be spotlighted (or exploited).

[archermoo]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

Just because it is a request for comment, I'll throw my $.02 in. I don't see any reason to change the existing cost. But then again, I'm pretty happy with the base rules being exactly where they are.

[Sean Waters]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

First off this is more of a problem in a superheroic game where strength (and other powers) can become more extreme.

 

Strength is not cost balanced with other powers, but it works well enough for the cost in the system. It is unbalancing but not so much so that it causes a lot of problems, mind you I think that has more to do with the way that we build our characters - working around the imbalance, favouring the wounded leg, rather than the non-existence of the problem. A brick will beat a blaster, assuming their other powers are similar and they are not playing in a completely artificial situation (an infinite and featureless desert, whether they start 500" apart, for example) and both characters are played to a reasonably realsitic standard and have the taks of defeating the other. Interestingly enough, I can see nothing that actually PREVENTS a brick having his strength inside a framework, but then you don't get figured characteristics, so it is less attractive (unless you can take the 'no figured' lim and make an extra few points on the deal, and frankly there are cheaper ways to do it).

 

The problem with simply making strength more expensive (which, it seems to me, is your solution: applying a +1/5 advantage to strength, in essence, is that strength is not necessarily uniformly useful: a 60 strength is more than twice as useful as a 30 strength, so having a straight line cost addition does not work for me.

 

My solution was to cut down on the freebies.

 

You are going to get freebies from simply having extra strength - as has been demonstrated time and again the figured charcteristics you get from strength exceed the cost of the strength in the first place, so if you were going to buy them up to that level anyway, the strength is, in effect, free. Better than free, you are getting more points from the figured than you spend on strength.

 

In addition, very high strength gives proportionally more advantages - as you say you can use large objects to hit things, thus improving your OCV or making the attack AoE, and you can throw objects to get a ranged attack, often well within the combat range of EBs and such like if you are playing in an area with plenty of cover, like a city.

 

If I were building the system today I'd do away with figured characteristics and you could pay for everything you want - they are nothing but a convenient shorthand anyway, another way in which the system for all its protestations of mechanical purity, is tied up with sfx at a very fundamanetal level.

 

In addition you could say that (as it is a power) you can not use strength over normal maxima (or, if you wish to be harsh and are playing a purely superhero game, at all) for hitting in combat with large objects or throwing objects as damaging missiles unless you buy the appropriate naked advantages (AoE and strength limited range, objects of opportunity).

 

Mind you we both know that is never going to happen. It is too much a foundation of the system, and even though it makes things lean a bit, we have got so used to tilting our heads when we look at it, we very rarely notice any more, and when we do, the vertigo soon passes

[Dust Raven]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

A brick will beat a blaster' date=' assuming their other powers are similar and they are not playing in a completely artificial situation [/quote']

 

This is not true and I wonder why people keep thinking it is. How do the rest of you play blasteres that they keep losing to bricks?

 

The brick's disadvantage is again, the lack of a ranged attack. Assuming the brick persists in making HTH attacks, the blaster is likely to keep him at bay with nothing more than KB from his blasts. The brick, needing to pick himself up first, will have to make a Move Through or Move By (reducing his OCV) in order to hit after taking KB. The Blaster just needs to get up and shoot (and if he's gonna take a range penalty, he can spread his attack).

 

Should the Brick decide he heeds to start throwing stuff around to level the playing field (in more ways than one apparently), the blaster still has the upperhand. It takes time to acquire something to throw. And the large stuff that makes a good AE attack even requires a Grab maneuver. At such a time, the Brick is more vulnerable to the Blaster's attack. Only if the Brick is lucky will he get to toss that truck. And even if he is lucky, the Blaster can always Dive For Cover and now the Brick has one less projectile while the Blaster still has is ranged attack.

 

 

This was proven in game when the PC brick with flight (about 400 points at the time) when up against two VIPER agents with blaster rifles and no movement powers (150 points each). The Brick was out of END and neary out of STUN and the agents handn't taken a single hit (and still had plenty of charges) after two turns of combat.

[Sean Waters]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

This is not true and I wonder why people keep thinking it is. How do the rest of you play blasteres that they keep losing to bricks?

 

The brick's disadvantage is again, the lack of a ranged attack. Assuming the brick persists in making HTH attacks, the blaster is likely to keep him at bay with nothing more than KB from his blasts. The brick, needing to pick himself up first, will have to make a Move Through or Move By (reducing his OCV) in order to hit after taking KB. The Blaster just needs to get up and shoot (and if he's gonna take a range penalty, he can spread his attack).

 

Should the Brick decide he heeds to start throwing stuff around to level the playing field (in more ways than one apparently), the blaster still has the upperhand. It takes time to acquire something to throw. And the large stuff that makes a good AE attack even requires a Grab maneuver. At such a time, the Brick is more vulnerable to the Blaster's attack. Only if the Brick is lucky will he get to toss that truck. And even if he is lucky, the Blaster can always Dive For Cover and now the Brick has one less projectile while the Blaster still has is ranged attack.

 

 

This was proven in game when the PC brick with flight (about 400 points at the time) when up against two VIPER agents with blaster rifles and no movement powers (150 points each). The Brick was out of END and neary out of STUN and the agents handn't taken a single hit (and still had plenty of charges) after two turns of combat.

 

I can only assume it was an inexperinced player then. A 400 point brick can pick up a subway car (or something equally large) and charge the agents. That's a lot of instant KB resistance (an extra 9" worth), which is going to deal with the KB from anything a 150 point agent is carrying, as well as temporary portable armour and an AoE attack when you get there. Or he can throw large objects into the field of fire so they can't get a bead until he's nearby. He wasn't daft enough to fly at them and give them extra KB, was he? Or if he did, did he do it through intervening walls using casual strength movethroughs, or at least land at the end of each phase?

 

Also we have grab-bys now: you can move and grab one or both agents THEN do multiple movethroughs on brick walls. Suddenly you are holding pulp.

 

Or fly above them and fall. Bet they can't do enough KB to keep you up in the air.

 

Or....

 

Blasters have really quite limited options and tactics compared to a brick. Bricks can lose, of course, but they'd really have to be making an effort.

[Sean Waters]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

...of course my opinion might be coloured by my regular players, at least two of whom play fantastic and very scary bricks.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

This is not true and I wonder why people keep thinking it is. How do the rest of you play blasteres that they keep losing to bricks?

 

The brick's disadvantage is again, the lack of a ranged attack. Assuming the brick persists in making HTH attacks, the blaster is likely to keep him at bay with nothing more than KB from his blasts. The brick, needing to pick himself up first, will have to make a Move Through or Move By (reducing his OCV) in order to hit after taking KB. The Blaster just needs to get up and shoot (and if he's gonna take a range penalty, he can spread his attack).

 

DR, I think you're being very fair to the Brick. It also bears noting that, if he does a Move By, his damage is likely reduced. A Move Through is his best bet, and even there he needs sufficient movement to get into range with a half move.

 

It's even worse if the Blaster can get an action in between and reserve to fire on the Brick "if he starts moving towards me or goews to pick something up"

 

Should the Brick decide he heeds to start throwing stuff around to level the playing field (in more ways than one apparently)' date=' the blaster still has the upperhand. It takes time to acquire something to throw. And the large stuff that makes a good AE attack even requires a Grab maneuver. At such a time, the Brick is more vulnerable to the Blaster's attack. Only if the Brick is lucky will he get to toss that truck. And even if he is lucky, the Blaster can always Dive For Cover and now the Brick has one less projectile while the Blaster still has is ranged attack.[/quote']

 

In the phase between the Grab and the Throw, nothing prevents the Blaster targetting one hex of that large trusk (if it's area effect, it must also be an area target) and damaging or demolishing it. Even if he just reduces its BOD, that may well reduce the damage the Brick throwing can inflict with it. It must also be noted that the Brick will eventually run out of things to throw.

 

SEAN: Pick up the subway car (1 phase). Run forward (you can't see, so do you know whether the agent you were headed for moved out of the way?). Are you suffering from encumbrance penalties? And if you do defeat the agents, look forward to an "unnecessary force" lawsuit. That poor normal human was run over by a subway car! Why, he's lucky to be alive! We must protect our children from menaces like Captain Strong!!

[Dust Raven]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

...of course my opinion might be coloured by my regular players' date=' at least two of whom play fantastic and very scary bricks.[/quote']

 

Which is why I asked about how people play the blasters.

 

As coinincidence would have it, the player of the brick was a bit daft. However, I played the VIPER agents the same way. They never took cover, stood within one hex of each other and both concentrated their full autofire on the same target on the same DEX in the same Segments. All things being equal (well, the points weren't, but two 8d6 EBs against a 60 STR brick with 24 ED seems fair).

 

Now assuming the brick did so something more clever, all the agents had to do is time their attacks to blast the brick as he's picking up a heavy objects (counts as a grab, brick at 1/2 DCV, excellent time for a Rapid Attack or Autofire). The fight was on the roof, so the brick could have gotten clever and taken out the building or at least the corner the agents were standing on... but agents can move, and not stand so close to each other.

 

For every clever action the brick could have performed, the agents could have countered it at range. Imagine if it was not two wimpy agents, but an full fledged blaster of equal point to the brick...

[Gary]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

I've never had a brick who would've been remotely threatened by 2 standard agents.

 

At the very worst, the brick does a Leap forward. That's 12" or 24" Noncombat (even if the brick doesn't have ANY other movement at all). The Agents will NEVER do enough knockback with a 8d6 autofire to make up for this. Even with 5 hits, (highly unlikely), that's 12"-7 or 5" knockback apiece on average. The agents will never get to the point where the brick wouldn't eventually smush them.

[Sean Waters]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

I feel the brick defeated himself 24 ed against even 2 coordinated 8d6 attacks averages 8 point of stun through defences, and VIPER agents are, what SPD 4? Assume they hit 3 times a round, that is 24 stun a turn, maybe 6 after PS12 REC. Fight all night...walk up to the building, laugh at any damage taken, try to end moves behind full cover..

 

They are on a roof, so the brick has enough cover to get to within a move of them (enters building at ground floor and flies UP....)

 

PRE attack should get them to stop long enough for him to get there and hit one: he doesn't need a movethrough: a 12d6 punch with probably 5" of KB to knock them off the building - and subsequent falling damage should take one out.

 

Then chummy has to run and fire, and I bet brick camn move quicker - he's get a 12" leap even if his flight is slow...doesn't even need to hit the agent - land on the roof nearby hard enough and it all collapses in...

 

When picking up objects, stand behind them so your lack of DCV matters not a jot. A car will take at least 3x8d6 hits to destroy, which is easily long enough to hoist and hurl...and while they are blowing that to bits they are not damaging or KBing the brick.

 

Buy some KBR with that 400 points...

 

To me it is all down to whether the blaster can maintain range - or has a greater move. It also assumes the blaster can afford to play cat and mouse...If the brick can afford to wait for the blaster to come to him, it is not contest

 

I'm not saying you are wrong that a blaster can beat a brick. I am saying that a strength based character, even apart from anything else, is generally tougher to hurt than a point equivalent blaster, and can take more punishment. Ultimately it is all down to build and circumstance, and, to an extent, luck, but I maintain that the brick has the advantage generally. One day we'll meet up over a beer,or two with some little figures and work out who's right

[Dust Raven]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

I won't dispute that the brick should have creamed the two agents. The fact that the brick actually lost is what matters. The only advantage the agents had was range, and it won the fight. Most of us would realize that, at subconsciously, and have to think of something clever to overcome that advantage. Relatively easy when you're built on 400 points. Just sucks for this player she didn't think of it.

I'm not saying you are wrong that a blaster can beat a brick. I am saying that a strength based character, even apart from anything else, is generally tougher to hurt than a point equivalent blaster, and can take more punishment. Ultimately it is all down to build and circumstance, and, to an extent, luck, but I maintain that the brick has the advantage generally. One day we'll meet up over a beer,or two with some little figures and work out who's right

 

I'd love too!

 

Keep in mind I'm not trying to say range beats STR all the time. They are balanced. A 400 point character is likely to be evenly matched against another 400 point character (assuming both are well designed and neither have munchkinesk concepts). You take a brick and an equivilant blaster and they should come out about 50/50 in the long run. My agrument is against the brick almost always trumping the blaster with STR and DEF.

[zornwil]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

Oh no, the STR debate!

 

I think STR is fine in super games, likely including anything high powered where there are lots of power options.

 

However, I think the value of STR does become an issue in heroic games, as the options of powers are often limited, so you don't quite have the same sorts of EBers and so on. And given the "STR framework" inherent, it is a bit easier for the bruiser to get by on points than many of his counterparts. I think a lot of Gary's arguments on STR register best in this environment, I don't agree it's so predictable with supers (I've certainly never had an EBer threatened by two standard agents, either).

 

As of late it seems to me that the best value for STR would be 1.5 per 1, but in a system already accused of being math-heavy maybe that's ugly. I could well see just proposing an optional split system for superheroics versus heroics, with appropriate caveats.

[prestidigitator]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

An idea I had a while ago was to seperate Str into two characteristics: Impact and Muscle (for lack of better words), each of which starts at 10 and costs 1 per point:

• Muscle is used for Figured Characteristics, physical lifting of weight, Encumberence, Grabs, and when you wish to resist Knockback (possibly also for heroic weapons with Str Min Does Not Affect Damage, including ranged weapons).
  
• Impact is used for other applications, such as bare Strike HTH damage, resisting Disarms, base damage for non-Grab Martial Arts, using HTH and thrown weapons, etc.
  
• Hand Attack is dropped completely (instead specific Limitations can be taken on Impact bought as a Power such as Only for Unarmed HTH Damage (-1/2), or Muscle bought as a Power such as Only for Grabs (-1/2)).
  
• Entangles can be against either Impact or Muscle, chosen at the time the Entangle is created (+1/4 Advantage to work against one chosen at time of use, +1/2 to work against whichever is lower, -1/4 to work against target's choice/whichever is higher; if an attack for which Impact can be applied is still useful--e.g. an Inaccessible Focus--Impact may always be applied, no matter the build of the Entangle). Elastic webs are an example of an Entangle for which Muscle might be more appropriate, while a rigid Ice Bubble is probably better defined against Impact.

Any character for which the player wishes the two to still be linked in terms of SFX can always buy the two Characteristics at the same value.

[Ura-Maru]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

Tisk tisk. Questioning the price of Str, eh? That means you’re a . . . ah . . . lets see. -checks list- A powergaming munchkin, an insane perfectionist who wants an impossibly perfect level of balance, a heretic for questioning the rules, a newbie who’s obviously too stupid to understand the concept of play balance, and some kind of socialist commie. Oh, and you’ve never read anything, because physical strength is the defining characteristic of heroism. Every important character in all genre fiction has a high strength.

 

Did I miss any?

 

Anyway, speaking as a long-time powergaming perfectionist newbie heretic commie illiterate, it’s not the damage, it’s not just the freebies, and it’s not just that strength is more flexible than most other powers at the same price level. It’s all three added together.

 

I more or less agree with zornwil, though. It’s not too big a problem in superheroic games because cheap and easy power frameworks soften the effect. Bricks are still more cost effective, (Why do you think the ‘smart brick’ is such a common archetype among experienced players?) but it’s shouldn’t ruin anyone’s fun, especially if the brick plays nice.

Though when the brick starts building power frameworks of ‘brick tricks’ of his very own, it starts to become a problem again. And when people drift away from the classic ‘class’ archetypes.

 

I actually did do STR at 1.5 in a game I ran in philly. Seemed about right for superheroic game, but to be fair, there weren’t many players, so there was less jockeying for ‘camera time’ than usual.

 

I admit I like the idea of pruning the free stuff STR gives you. Actually, I’d like to prune most of the freebies EVERYTHING gives you. Building a spear shouldn’t require three different disads on Stretching, dammit . . .

 

Alternatively, making a ‘power’ version of STR, (like Armor is for defenses) that CAN be put in power frameworks would make a 2 point version of STR much more workable for superheroic games. 2 points per is about right for Heroic games, so it would work there, too. And would simplify builds for things like power armor and martial arts power tricks, and a lot of drain special effects.

 

It would require some tweaks to other powers, of course. Though I don’t think it would be as catastrophic a ripple effect as some have threatened. Most of the things it would effect directly could use a bit of tweaking, anyway, to my mind.

 

Characteristic cost problems are a bigger problem than, say, endless Aid loops, XDM UAA, or continent-scarring Megascale AOEs, or all the other goofiness Hero comes up with. Characteristics are, for most gamers, the core of the system, and the first thing new recruits look at.

 

When something as basic as ‘I want to be fast AND strong’ gets the GM complaining about game balance, this is not an encouraging sign. And when, five minutes into character creation, you realize that buying five points of STR gives you five and a half points of free stuff, it’s not unreasonable to wonder ‘Why is all this math here at all, if I’m just supposed to ignore it?’

 

WE may be used to it and have adapted, but telling new recruits ‘yes, I know it’s a problem, but it’s always been that way’ makes the entire point-buy system seem arbitrary.

 

Ah, well. Not going to happen, officially, anyway. Remember what happened GURPS split up intelligence? Long time fans HATE it when you change stats around. And Hero’s market is what, 85% long time fans?

 

Cutting the freebies, while not perfect, would probably be an acceptable compromise. A lot of the STR freebies make just as much sense, or more, if they were powered by something else.

 

---

Fortunately, bricks are less flashy than energy projectors, and less sexy than martial artists. So there are less of them than their might otherwise be . . .

[Dust Raven]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

Emphisis mine:

 

Tisk tisk. Questioning the price of Str' date=' eh? That means you’re a . . . ah . . . lets see. -checks list- A powergaming munchkin, an insane perfectionist who wants an impossibly perfect level of balance, a heretic for questioning the rules, [b']a newbie who’s obviously too stupid to understand the concept of play balance[/b], and some kind of socialist commie. Oh, and you’ve never read anything, because physical strength is the defining characteristic of heroism. Every important character in all genre fiction has a high strength.

 

Did I miss any?

 

That's not fair! There are many extremely experienced gamers, highly familiar with the Hero System who don't understand the concept of play balance.

 

[Force]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

The brick's disadvantage is again' date=' the lack of a ranged attack. [/quote']

 

Passing Strike is a brick's best friend.

[Dust Raven]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

Passing Strike is a brick's best friend.

 

And Martial Throw, is arch enemy.

[Rapier]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

And Martial Throw' date=' is arch enemy.[/quote']

 

Get thee hence, vile Thread-Necromancer!!

 

Do not raise this eldritch beast!

[Dust Raven]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

Get thee hence, vile Thread-Necromancer!!

 

Do not raise this eldritch beast!

 

Sorry, but I can't help but make fun of Bricks.

[Sean Waters]

Re: RFC: Adjustment to STR cost

 

Emphisis mine:

 

 

 

That's not fair! There are many extremely experienced gamers, highly familiar with the Hero System who don't understand the concept of play balance.

 

 

 

What?