Heroic level characteristics ramble

[Sean Waters]

It has been my experience that human characteristics tend to fall in a pretty narrow range for most people. I like to think I’m reasonably strong, but my 11 year old has a substantial proportion of my strength already. I’m in the slightly-above-average range. I think most people are.

 

If you look at the strength table 200 strength is a lift of 400 kg (or up to 1600kg if you allow pushing). Now there is not a record for weight that you can just get off the ground – at least that I could find – but the world record clean and jerk is 263 kg: almost exactly a strength of 17 without pushing.

 

Strength is quite easy to compare, but we can probably do intelligence as well – assume 1 INT = 10 IQ, works out about right – very few will exceed 13.

 

I think we can probably assume that every one of the characteristics is about the same: the normal human range is probably 8-12 or thereabouts.

 

So why do we keep building characters with Strength 15+ in heroic games?

 

Partly because we have to: you NEED a strength of 13 to wield a battle axe efficiently, partly because characteristics (not just strength) tend to be a good deal, and partly because we are probably, at some level, indoctrinated into the dnd 3-18 thing.

 

What’s my point?

 

Well:

 

1. Generally characters should be built with the 8-12 range of characteristics – it will only be a very exceptional character that strays outside this

2. Although I’ve seen criticisms that Hero does not provide enough variation in characteristics, it seems to me that there is plenty – I mean if you are measuring IQ, the difference between 120 and 115 is pretty negligible: a 10 point gap is probably not worth breaking down more.

 

So: how do we do it? Well we could start at: NCM cuts in past 12 points, not once you get to 20. That should discourage some of the wilder excesses, or at least remind people that a 13+ characteristic really is quite exceptional.

 

Then I thought about the sword thing: seems to me that people who have never used a sword before find it awkward and tiring even if they are strong, whereas the proficient have developed the particular muscles needed to wield the weapon: we could have characteristics bought with limitations like: only to wield weapons (-1). The normal NCM would apply to bonus characteristics bought this way (i.e. at 20).

 

Skill levels should be encouraged more. I KNOW it is more expensive than characteristics, but we are shooting for a bit of realism here. Someone proficient in kung fu probably has no better DEX and reactions than a lot of other people – what they do have is hardwired reflexes and a far better anticipation of combat events – i.e. skill and experience rather than phenomenal DEX.

 

One other slightly disconnected point: if you have a STR of 10 you have a casual strength of which means you can lift 50kg without any real effort as a zero phase action (erm…), BUT it costs the same END to do so as it would for a 5 STR character who is approaching their limits. I know there is a balance between realism and playability but has anyone considered this at all, and do you have an easy fix? (like, I suppose, ignoring END use for casual strength not used for more than a turn at a time, or somesuch)

 

Any thoughts?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

[nitpick] You do mean 20 STR, not 200 right?

 

And I would say that no more than half of all people are stronger than average. The other half would be weaker. Average would be right in the middle somewhere.

 

[/nitpick]

 

Why do heroic characters have high Characteristics? Because they are heroic, iconic characters who stand head and shoulders above the average person. Yes, I know, there are lots of stories about perfectly "normal" people doing heroic things, but such characters are far, far from what is typical of the heroic protagonist.

 

I'm no authority of swordsmanship, especially for heavier blades. I'm personaly familiar with lighter weapons, such as the rapier. I consider myself strong, but don't know how well I could weild something like a broadsword. As for muscles-only-for-swinging-sharp-sticks, I'd be against it. A muscle is a muscle. The muscles in my legs have been conditions to be strong from mowing lawns and intensive swimming and bicycling in the teen years. I don't have STR "Only To Push Lawnmowers" or any such thing, and if I were to kick someone, it hurt a lot, and if I can leverage my legs to lift something, I can lift a LOT.

 

The Skill Level versus DEX thing is debatable. I've done the I have more DEX than you because I've had 20 years of Kung Fu lessons. Sure, it's all skill and not an ounce of natural talent, but those reflexes count for everything, not just punching and blocking. On the other hand, I can say that I havn't had 20 years of training, just a rough life in the back alleys on the way home from school, and have a few levels with Punch, Block and Grab By.

 

I don't think Casual STR works like you think it does. It's more of an "effortless" exhertion that allows you to shrug asside obsticles, not lift them. You never use Casual STR to throw or punch, only to break out of entangles, grabs or knock down small children while running.

[Just Joe]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

I seem to care a lot more about realism in gaming than the vast majority of Herophiles, but I share virtually none of the concerns you have expressed here.

 

I think the main reason that I am untroubled is that I don't take the attempts to define characteristic-levels seriously. Even STR, the most quantifiable characteristic, assumes that everyone who can lift the same weight can jump as far, for example. I choose simply to interpret a 10 in a primary characteristic as averagish (median, mean, whathaveyou, I don't need precision here), a 20 as just about the human limit, and values in-between accordingly.

 

Part of the reason I take this approach is that I agree with the criticisms that Hero does not provide enough variation in characteristics (at the heroic level). Take your INT/IQ example. In real life, the difference between an 80 IQ and a 120 IQ is substantial. In the Hero system, the difference between an 8 INT and a 12 INT is negligable, particularly in a game without mental powers. For most purposes, there are five "normal" INT levels: 0-2, 3-7, 8-12, 13-17, and 18-20. So unless your character is substantially below average, you can be average, above average, and well above average. Your suggestion would give virtually everyone an 11- INT roll. That gives virtually no room for differentiation in game terms. That might be realistic in terms of your and/or official real world to game world conversions, but is not realistic in that it makes virtually everyone functionally equivalent (admittedly, my case is not as strong for stats other than INT, but I think the same principle holds.

 

As for the appropriate CHAR levels for heroic level games using my approach: it depends on what you're trying to model. If you're going for a fairly realistic game with not-so-exceptional heroes, then I'd recommend mostly 8-12's, but also enough 13's to allow for some differentiation, and even a few higher stats, maybe one PC per group with an 18+ in one stat. For a fairly realistic game with truly exceptional heroes, I'd allow plenty of 13-15's, and a few 16-20's. For cinematic or other unrealistic games, I'd try to keep stat inflation from destroying differentiation, but otherwise plenty of 18-20's are fine, and even a few 21+'s can be allowed, because many "normal" fictional heroes can perform superhuman feats.

[Trained Chicken]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Bigger stats are just plain more fun, man.

[Lucius]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

If you look at the strength table 200 strength is a lift of 400 kg (or up to 1600kg if you allow pushing). Now there is not a record for weight that you can just get off the ground – at least that I could find – but the world record clean and jerk is 263 kg: almost exactly a strength of 17 without pushing.

 

Strength is quite easy to compare, but we can probably do intelligence as well – assume 1 INT = 10 IQ, works out about right – very few will exceed 13.

 

Thanks for the STR info – nice to know.

 

As for the INT, I think the problem here is that what Hero means by “INT†is not what most people mean by “Intelligence†by a long shot. In fact, I think it’s been said officially that a Nobel-winning genius can have an INT of 10 with a logical, methodical, powerful but plodding intellect. INT is sort of like intellectual SPD or DEX. It’s how fast you think not how well.

 

I think we can probably assume that every one of the characteristics is about the same: the normal human range is probably 8-12 or thereabouts.

 

So why do we keep building characters with Strength 15+ in heroic games?

 

Partly because we have to: you NEED a strength of 13 to wield a battle axe efficiently, partly because characteristics (not just strength) tend to be a good deal…

 

Yeah, and maybe that means the whole concept of STR minima needs to be revisited…

 

So: how do we do it? Well we could start at: NCM cuts in past 12 points, not once you get to 20. That should discourage some of the wilder excesses, or at least remind people that a 13+ characteristic really is quite exceptional.

 

The NCM is a bad idea to begin with. Changing where it’s set doesn’t make it any better. Granted, I’m not sure it makes it any worse.

 

Then I thought about the sword thing: seems to me that people who have never used a sword before find it awkward and tiring even if they are strong, whereas the proficient have developed the particular muscles needed to wield the weapon: we could have characteristics bought with limitations like: only to wield weapons (-1). The normal NCM would apply to bonus characteristics bought this way (i.e. at 20).

 

Maybe a better idea would be to have STR mins that are actually REALISTIC. Possibly for people who don’t have the Weapons Familiarity, add 5 to the STR min.

 

Skill levels should be encouraged more. I KNOW it is more expensive than characteristics, but we are shooting for a bit of realism here. Someone proficient in kung fu probably has no better DEX and reactions than a lot of other people – what they do have is hardwired reflexes and a far better anticipation of combat events – i.e. skill and experience rather than phenomenal DEX.

 

In game terms, all that skill and experience **IS** “phenomenal DEX.â€

 

 

Any thoughts?

 

Plenty

 

[nitpick] You do mean 20 STR, not 200 right?

 

And I would say that no more than half of all people are stronger than average. The other half would be weaker. Average would be right in the middle somewhere.

.

 

Not necessarily. If Mr. Waters doesn’t mind, let’s take 10 of his friends to the gym and test their STR. To protect their privacy, we’ll refer to them by letters.

 

A 11 STR

B 11 STR

C 11 STR

D 11 STR

E 11 STR

F 11 STR

G 11 STR

H 11 STR

I 8 STR

J 4 STR

 

Adding it all up we get 100 STR – dividing by 10, we have an average STR of 10.

Yet I see that 8 of 10 people, or 80%, are actually above average in STR. At least for this group.

 

 

That said, I have no idea if this group is a valid microcosm of the Human population. I actually doubt it, as I suspect the average adult STR is closer to 8.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

And an above average palindromedary

[Sean Waters]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Thank you Lucius for making me look slightly less stupid: I really shouldn't post late at night

 

I kinda divide characteristics up into groups: STR BODY and COM - you never really do a characteristic roll for, CON and EGO which do have rolls associated with them resonably frequently but not for skill resolution and then DEX, INT and PRE which are all skill bases.

 

Now Dust Raven makes the point that a trained martial artist will probably have better than average DEX (there I go again), and I agree, but I doubt that many get anywhere near human max. Even if you do the variation between average (8-10 points) and almost superhuman (20 points) is only +2 on 3d6: not a lot. Moreover, if you did have very high DEX it should make you good at all sorts of things, like lockpicking, which does not follow to my mind.

 

Similarly I don't think skill levels on their own work well, or at least do not do all I'd like them to. Say you are playing a detective: no genius, but excellent at what he does well - detective work. You buy high skills, fine, but then you need to buy high PER too, and all kindsa stuff to make it work. Would it not be better to buy limited INT? So you have 10 INT +10 INT only for detective work (-1/2 to -1 depending on campaign) then when a PER roll is called for to spot a clue you are working off a bonus of +4, and when a PER roll is required to note that your boss is angry with you you work off a base of +2: you are good at whet you are good at. This seems to me liek a far better way of defining the character that you want rather than simply going for what is most point efficient.

 

A martial artist might buy +10 DEX for martial arts (increasing OCV/DCV and Dex rolls for combat) and get maybe -1/2 on it. A rogue might buy +10 PRE with fast talk, bluff and anything related to it, defined as glib tongue or +5 PRE defined as good looks - the definition then determining when it can be used.

 

This would also help to explain why a nobel prize winner has a 5 INT: he has +25 INT with physics. He is barely capable of functioning in society, but can imagine and extrapolate the interactions of atoms.

 

Finally I'd keep the NCM, or even reduce it, but remove it entirely for limited characteristics: that would enable a character to be built that really conformed to your concept without needing to be (necessarily) the smartest or most charismatic person in the world.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

...............

I'm no authority of swordsmanship, especially for heavier blades. I'm personaly familiar with lighter weapons, such as the rapier. I consider myself strong, but don't know how well I could weild something like a broadsword. As for muscles-only-for-swinging-sharp-sticks, I'd be against it. A muscle is a muscle. The muscles in my legs have been conditions to be strong from mowing lawns and intensive swimming and bicycling in the teen years. I don't have STR "Only To Push Lawnmowers" or any such thing, and if I were to kick someone, it hurt a lot, and if I can leverage my legs to lift something, I can lift a LOT.

 

I used to do a lot of swimming - at City and County level, but then I stopped as it was either do it practically full time or get some qualifications - and I was noever going to be THAT good. I did plenty of other sport, and stayed fit, but I didn't swim for maybe a couple of years.

 

When I did I thought I was fit enough (and I - I ran and weightlifted and played rugby) BUT boy howdy was it a shock: my speed had gone, my stamina had gone, and I ached like crazy afterwards. I was not weaker (I was probably a lot stronger then) but I just was not used to that sort of exercise. I started swimming more regualrly, and it all came (part way) back. i don't think my overall strength went up, but I could swim better with practice. Sometimes it is not about absolute strength, but what you are good at using your strength for. It gets silly if you define it too closely, but I don't think it is a bad thing to keep in mind when character building ESPECIALLY if you are thinking about characteristic minima for real weapons: does this character REALLY need to be able to lift 200kg to use a battle axe properly?

 

...............

I don't think Casual STR works like you think it does. It's more of an "effortless" exhertion that allows you to shrug asside obsticles, not lift them. You never use Casual STR to throw or punch, only to break out of entangles, grabs or knock down small children while running.

 

OK: but hit a 5 STR and a 10 STR with a 1d6 entangle, it still seems to me that the first one is going to use far more energy getting out than the second, but that is not reflected in game. This is a minor point, no biggie at all, but I just wondered if anyone had addressed it?

 

Good nitpicks though I should consider buying +10 INT and DEX for posting, really, shouldn't I?

[Gary]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Str is what you can barely lift off the ground and stagger a couple of steps. I think most people can move 166 pounds (8 Str) off the ground and stagger a couple of steps. And there are many people who can move 333 pounds (13 Str) off the ground and stagger. So athletic fit people who purchase 13 Str doesn't bother me.

 

For Int, I prefer to think of it as 8 Int = 100 IQ. And every point of Int equates to 5 IQ.

 

So NCM would be 160 IQ (very few people actually exceed this) at 20 Int, and 210 IQ at 30 Int which is the highest an age 60+ can achieve without spending double. Almost nobody in real life has ever hit that level.

 

Now every 25 pts of IQ is a different Int bracket, and 25 pt steps is substantial enough to notice in real life.

[OddHat]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Str is what you can barely lift off the ground and stagger a couple of steps. I think most people can move 166 pounds (8 Str) off the ground and stagger a couple of steps. And there are many people who can move 333 pounds (13 Str) off the ground and stagger. So athletic fit people who purchase 13 Str doesn't bother me.

 

I can move just over 500 pounds off the ground these days and stand there, and I'm not particularly strong for my weight class by power lifting standards. I wouldn't want to try to walk around with it; one false step and my back would never forgive me.

If you look at the strength table 200 strength is a lift of 400 kg (or up to 1600kg if you allow pushing). Now there is not a record for weight that you can just get off the ground – at least that I could find – but the world record clean and jerk is 263 kg: almost exactly a strength of 17 without pushing.

This is a clean and jerk. As you can see, the weight ends up well above your head.

 

You can google for Deadlift records. That's much closer to lifting capacity as measured in HERO.

 

The best deadlifters in the world deadlift just around 1000 pounds in competition, though there are claims here and there of much higher totals.

[OddHat]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Additional: I like to keep stat differentiation, if it's needed at all, at the "what would the writer say" level.

 

"He's twice as strong as a normal man!" = roughly 13 STR

 

"He had the strength of ten men!" = roughly 25 STR

 

"He had the strength of one hundred men!" = roughly 43 STR

 

Tying things too closely to real world numbers doesn't tend to add to a cinematic game.

[Gary]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

I can move just over 500 pounds off the ground these days and stand there, and I'm not particularly strong for my weight class by power lifting standards. I wouldn't want to try to walk around with it; one false step and my back would never forgive me.

 

 

Sounds like you have a 13-14 Str to me.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Str is what you can barely lift off the ground and stagger a couple of steps. I think most people can move 166 pounds (8 Str) off the ground and stagger a couple of steps. And there are many people who can move 333 pounds (13 Str) off the ground and stagger. So athletic fit people who purchase 13 Str doesn't bother me.

 

For Int, I prefer to think of it as 8 Int = 100 IQ. And every point of Int equates to 5 IQ.

 

So NCM would be 160 IQ (very few people actually exceed this) at 20 Int, and 210 IQ at 30 Int which is the highest an age 60+ can achieve without spending double. Almost nobody in real life has ever hit that level.

 

Now every 25 pts of IQ is a different Int bracket, and 25 pt steps is substantial enough to notice in real life.

 

 

I like that INT progression - makes a lot of sense!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

I can move just over 500 pounds off the ground these days and stand there, and I'm not particularly strong for my weight class by power lifting standards. I wouldn't want to try to walk around with it; one false step and my back would never forgive me.

 

This is a clean and jerk. As you can see, the weight ends up well above your head.

 

You can google for Deadlift records. That's much closer to lifting capacity as measured in HERO.

 

The best deadlifters in the world deadlift just around 1000 pounds in competition, though there are claims here and there of much higher totals.

 

Thanks for the information and pointers: The way I've always played Hero is that if you have a STR of 35 you can lift a truck, but that is not quite right, is it? With 35 STR you could get under it an lever it off the ground but to properly 'lift' it you need MORE strength than that - looking at the deadlift to clean and jerk comparisons I'd say at least +4 STR to get the object off the ground and over your head briefly. That's interesting....

[OddHat]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Sounds like you have a 13-14 Str to me.

 

As I said, not particularly strong.

 

Ultimate Brick lists the Deadlift as 90% of your Hero System lifting capacity, which means that in HERO system I have a current STR of around 16.

 

Which is ridiculous by real world standards, because there's no way that I can manage a 6 meter Long Jump or jump 3 meters straight up.

 

Ultimate Brick also lists a Clean and Jerk a 50% of your lifting capacity. UB, p.9

 

Anyway, if a chubby little desk job worker like myself can achieve a 16 STR, I have no trouble allowing big strapping cinematic heroes to run around with a STR 20.

[Kelcyron]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

So why do we keep building characters with Strength 15+ in heroic games?

 

Because it's a heroic game with heroic characters, not a normals game with normal characters.

 

Kelcyron

[OddHat]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Thanks for the information and pointers: The way I've always played Hero is that if you have a STR of 35 you can lift a truck' date=' but that is not quite right, is it? With 35 STR you could get under it an lever it off the ground but to properly 'lift' it you need MORE strength than that - looking at the deadlift to clean and jerk comparisons I'd say at least +4 STR to get the object off the ground and over your head briefly. That's interesting....[/quote']

 

Sounds about right. Very few lifters can manage more than 1/2 their deadlift in a clean and jerk.

 

That said, grip also makes a huge difference; odd shaped and unbalanced objects are usually harder to handle than a barbell. Also, STR varies from movement to movement and from day to day, and can be trained with much more specificity than most people realize. In the end, a single STR score will always be an abstraction.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Sounds about right. Very few lifters can manage more than 1/2 their deadlift in a clean and jerk.

 

That said, grip also makes a huge difference; odd shaped and unbalanced objects are usually harder to handle than a barbell. Also, STR varies from movement to movement and from day to day, and can be trained with much more specificity than most people realize. In the end, a single STR score will always be an abstraction.

 

 

All good points; it seems to me that a STR of about +10 would probably be needed to get an awkward shaped object lofted - something bulky like a truck.

 

OTOH (as you see in a lot of 'strongman' competitions) it doesn't take as much STR to roll or push around an object: I reckon you could probably tip over a truck with a STR in the 25-30 region.

 

I must work up some sort of table....

[Black Rose]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Similarly I don't think skill levels on their own work well, or at least do not do all I'd like them to. Say you are playing a detective: no genius, but excellent at what he does well - detective work. You buy high skills, fine, but then you need to buy high PER too, and all kindsa stuff to make it work. Would it not be better to buy limited INT? So you have 10 INT +10 INT only for detective work (-1/2 to -1 depending on campaign) then when a PER roll is called for to spot a clue you are working off a bonus of +4, and when a PER roll is required to note that your boss is angry with you you work off a base of +2: you are good at whet you are good at. This seems to me liek a far better way of defining the character that you want rather than simply going for what is most point efficient.

 

A martial artist might buy +10 DEX for martial arts (increasing OCV/DCV and Dex rolls for combat) and get maybe -1/2 on it. A rogue might buy +10 PRE with fast talk, bluff and anything related to it, defined as glib tongue or +5 PRE defined as good looks - the definition then determining when it can be used.

 

This would also help to explain why a nobel prize winner has a 5 INT: he has +25 INT with physics. He is barely capable of functioning in society, but can imagine and extrapolate the interactions of atoms.

 

Finally I'd keep the NCM, or even reduce it, but remove it entirely for limited characteristics: that would enable a character to be built that really conformed to your concept without needing to be (necessarily) the smartest or most charismatic person in the world.

This is a great idea; I like it a lot! Just wanted to mention that, with the "+10 DEX, Only for Martial Arts", that should probably add to Speed normally, too. It makes sense that someone "highly trained" in Martial Arts would have better reaction time and be able to act more often, but only when they're using Martial Arts.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

So why do we keep building characters with Strength 15+ in heroic games?

Because STR is too cheap. I say that partially just to annoy you, and partially because it's true. If STR cost 2 points (as I think it should), players would be more likely to spend those 10 points on something else. A mere 5 points for 3 STUN, 1 PD, 1 REC, 1" Leaping, and +1d6 HtH (10 points if purchased separately) is too good a deal to pass up. And I didn't even include the added lifting and throwing capacity.

 

Seriously, that is a very real factor, but I can understand why you might not want to change this thread to that topic. As Oddhat points out, a clean and jerk is not the same as barely lift off the ground. One way to think of it (which fits nicely into heroic adventuring) is that the max STR lift on the STR Table is the heavy weight you can lift off of someone trapped underneath it for long enough for them to get out from under it before you have to drop it again. Assuming they can move. If not, you need a third person to pull them out. TUB gives factors for other types of lift, 50% for clean and jerk, 40% for snatch (one smooth motion to above your head), 75% for bench press, etc.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Now Dust Raven makes the point that a trained martial artist will probably have better than average DEX (there I go again), and I agree, but I doubt that many get anywhere near human max.

That's pretty much what I meant. I doubt that your average black belt has better than a DEX 13, but a DEX 13 is still higher than what I think the average guy who's just bought his pajamas has.

 

Similarly I don't think skill levels on their own work well, or at least do not do all I'd like them to. Say you are playing a detective...

Limited INT is not something I'm particulary fond of, but I suppose that's just personal taste. Take the detective you mentioned, technically he should have really high rolls for Deduction, Criminology, Concealment and a few other Intellect Skills, and definately have a good PER roll, but not necessarily have a good roll Tactics or Computer Programming. Of course, he doesn't even have to take those skills. In my opinion, a character with so much natural talent could easily apply it to all fields that use the same basic ability (awareness and logical reasoning). Should the detective apply himself in the realm of computers, he'd likely have a high roll. Otherwise he'd probably not even have the Skill.

 

The same can be said for the Martial Artist and the limited DEX. If you're that good, you likely have the ability to apply those reflexes to other activities. A guy who's lightning quick to dodge a legsweep isn't likely to trip over the curb.

 

When I did I thought I was fit enough (and I - I ran and weightlifted and played rugby) BUT boy howdy was it a shock: my speed had gone, my stamina had gone, and I ached like crazy afterwards. I was not weaker (I was probably a lot stronger then) but I just was not used to that sort of exercise. I started swimming more regualrly, and it all came (part way) back. i don't think my overall strength went up, but I could swim better with practice. Sometimes it is not about absolute strength, but what you are good at using your strength for. It gets silly if you define it too closely, but I don't think it is a bad thing to keep in mind when character building ESPECIALLY if you are thinking about characteristic minima for real weapons: does this character REALLY need to be able to lift 200kg to use a battle axe properly?

 

 

This, I feel, is related to the issue with the detective and his INT. There is a difference between ability and action. Perhaps the guy who wields the battle axe effectively can lift 200kg, but does he? Of course, this treads in a bit on paying for what you actually use. I have a Champions character who carries around a rapier, a real one, that he even knows how to use, but never actually used it. I paid no points for it. For all intents and purposes it's just another part of his costume. In the case of the axe wielding strongman, it could be said that if all he ever uses the STR for is wielding the axe, and never for lifting, punching, leaping and such, that he should be charged less.

 

This somewhat goes against what I said before. First and foremost, I believe in charging points for actual utility and what the player is going to really do with it. From a balance standpoint, I still prefer not to have such Limitations on Characteristics of any kind. I'm not even a fan of Lightning Reflexes. Just a matter of personal taste for me, and I try to make my players aware of what they can really do, and if they don't really want to do it, I try not to charge them more for doing less.

 

OK: but hit a 5 STR and a 10 STR with a 1d6 entangle, it still seems to me that the first one is going to use far more energy getting out than the second, but that is not reflected in game. This is a minor point, no biggie at all, but I just wondered if anyone had addressed it?

 

I see your point. Time is still a factor though. I like to think of it as requiring a certain amount of force to proceed. That amount of force pretty much makes the amount of effort equal no matter who's doing it. Some will be more efficient than others of course. Your example is a poor one (no offense, but neither character can escape using casual STR without rolling max damage). Instead, how about the difference between a 10 STR and a 20 STR versus that 1d6 Entangle? The 10 STR, using his full STR, will likely escape using a full phase. The 20 STR will likely escape as a 0 phase action. Both spend the same END for the action, but one takes less time. If Mr 20 STR take any other action that used STR in that Phase, he doesn't spend any additional END for it either.

[Just Joe]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Because STR is too cheap . . . And I didn't even include the added lifting and throwing capacity.

. . . or the increased ability to hold opponents or escape from others' holds.

 

We now return you to your regularly-scheduled thread.

[radix]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

One other slightly disconnected point: if you have a STR of 10 you have a casual strength of which means you can lift 50kg without any real effort as a zero phase action (erm…), BUT it costs the same END to do so as it would for a 5 STR character who is approaching their limits. I know there is a balance between realism and playability but has anyone considered this at all, and do you have an easy fix? (like, I suppose, ignoring END use for casual strength not used for more than a turn at a time, or somesuch)

 

I have an argument which is perhaps technically unsatisfying, but practically I think it's meaningful: A character with 5 STR is *very* unlikely to have the same CON as a character with 10 STR, so the weakling's END used will generally be a significantly larger portion of his total END.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

Radix' point made me think about why I started this thread: right, low STR is often associated with low general fitness...but not necessarily: I mean if you take a 14 year old female olympic gymnast: good strength to weight ratio, no reason to have a low CON but on the Hero absolute scale absolutely rubbish at arm wrestling. How is this relevant? well it comes back to building what you WANT in a character as opposed to building what the system 'suggests' you build.

 

Hero has some breakpoint advantages: certain characteristic levels are far more efficient than others (3,5,8, usually), so we tend to see these a lot. This is not just metagaming: it really can be hard to define particular characteristics when there is no in-game mechanic for determining exactly what level it should be at: an INT 15 and INT 16 make no difference in-game, but might make a real difference to the individuals.

 

STR CAN be differentiated more finely, as there are specific rules for what you can lift, and you MIGHT need a 16 STR as opposed to a 15 STR to wield a particular weapon. As PhilFleishmann points out, STR is efficient, in game terms, so it gets bought. i'm talking about starting with the character concept and more or less ignoring what effect particular character design decisions will have on character efficeincy, unless they are reflecting a character concept consideration. (DEX also matters, especially in heroic games where everyone is likey to have a similar speed, as it determines combat order.)

 

To take an example, the great Sword requires a strength of 17, and the Maul a strength of 18 to wield, which should mean that only a tiny proportion of 'real' people should be able to use them, but they were not uncommon weapons at one time - whole units being equipped with them - and they were not all hulking giants.

 

I do appreciate that I am looking here at very minor points, but at heroic level, there is limited scope for real variation between characters.

 

The other problem I have is that one charcteristic can do a lot: Dust raven mentions a martial artist being less likely to trip over a kerb, and I agree: a martial artist probably (in addiiton to martial arts skill) has above average STR, CON and DEX, and maybe PRE too, but do they really have the sort of levels that we so often see in characters? I think not.

 

DEX, you see, covers not just general agility, but manual dexterity, reaction speed and so on. I can see a martial artist having higher general activity, a higher reaction speed IN COMBAT but not necessarily a higher degree of manual dexterity.

 

The suggestion therefore is that whilst, for the sake of everyone's sanity, Hero groups similar abilities under a general characteristic heading, that one one to more accurately suggest a particular character, in keeping with heroic fiction, and as a way around the NCM, without things getting too out of hand, would be to use limited characteristics.

 

One final example; javelin throwers. THEORETICALLY (in the Hero world) the only way to lob a javelin a really long way is to have high strength: skill determines if you hit, but strength determines range. Looking at real world champions, they go for a balance of strength speed and technique. They don't go for massive strength - even the best are athletically, rather than 'powerfully' built. To me that is a character who has bought extra strength for throwing, and could apply that both to range and damage for a thrown javelin, without necessarily being able to use that strength for any other purpose. OK you could do the extra damage with skill levels but you can't do the extra range any other way.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

I'm of the camp that believes in Skill over Characteristics for representing a characters skill and experience. I view Characteristics as "Raw Talent" and always will.

 

As to the suggestion of using limited characteristics for specific tasks (+10 INT only for Detective work, etc) I believe that Skill Levels can cover this particular task if they are used in a more flexible way.

 

For example, if someone wanted to be an incredible detective without being a super genious, I would suggest that they purchase 5pt skill levels to "Detective skills". As the GM, how I would handle that is that any skill that is being used as a part of their detective work, the skill level would apply, including their Perception rolls when looking for clues to solve a case or mystery.

 

When it comes to Hero, thinking outside the box can oftentimes solve an issue that many believe to be a problem inherent in the system. Most people see the 5pt skill level (+1 with a group of similar Skills) as only applying to all skills of a particular characteristic (all Dex skills, or all Int skills etc) but this isn't necesarily the case. Its with a group of similar Skills. It could mean all Dex skills, but it couls also mean All engineering skills (Mechanics, Electronics, Inventor, SS: Robotics, SS: Nuclear Physics etc) All Area Knowleges, All Theif skills (Climbing, Concealment, Disguise, Lockpicking, Shadowing, Stealth, Sleight of Hand) and all Detective skills (Bribery, Bureaucratics,Concealment, Conversation, Criminology, Deduction, Forensic Medicine, Interrogation, PS: Detective, Shadowing, Streetwise) the possibilities are nigh limitless.

 

Thus, instead of making a Detective character with a 10 Int +10 Int for Detective work (-1) for 5 pts (comparing to the above list of skills essential for a good Detective, he would only gain a +2 for Concealment, Criminology, Deduction, Forensic medicine, PS: Detective maybe and Shadowing. All his other Detective skills go unenhanced) I would gain a +2 to all of the above listed skills, which includes not only Intellect, but Interaction and a General skill in the list, for a mere 10pts.

 

However, for myself personally, I don't really like using limited characteristics very often and I avoid it wherever possible. You know, I'm that guy that gives Batman a STR 20 and DEX 20 and craploads of skill levels. (but lets not start that conversation again!)

[OddHat]

Re: Heroic level characteristics ramble

 

I'd allow 3 point Skill Levels to cover "All Detective Skills" in the same way that 3 point Combat Skill Levels already cover all martial maneuvers in a given martial art. It may be stretching things a bit, but in a campaign with no NCM, 5 point skill levels are often a bit overpriced compared to the benefits of just buying raw stats.