New build

[Lord Mhoram]

Here is something I came up with for a character - someone who is incredibly strong willed.

 

7 +10 CON (20 Active Points); No Figured Characteristics (-1/2), Requires A Skill Roll (Ego Roll) (-1/2), If activates, -2 DCV and lose a half phase (-1/2), Only to resist stunning (-1/4)

 

 

The idea is that when an attack would ordinarily stun the character, they have enough force of will (or force of personality, or just plain gutsyness) to fight through the stun - instead of losing a whole phase and dropping to 1/2 DCV, the character loses 2 DCV and loses a half phase. They have to make an Ego roll at -2 to do so.

 

Of course if they blow the Ego roll or the attack would stun them with the +10 con, then they are fully stunned anyway.

 

Mechanically it is sort of nice to have something between Stunned and not stunned. Ads a little gradation.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: New build

 

Cool idea! I'll rep you when I'm able.

[Psylint]

Re: New build

 

Brilliant my Lord,

 

I've been trying to model a "stagger" effect less than stunned for a while.

 

Repped

[ghost-angel]

Re: New build

 

Cool idea, Repped.

[Comic]

Re: New build

 

Is 'only to resist Stunning' a -1/4 limitation for CON that's already got no figured characteristics?

 

Are CON rolls that common in your campaign? What else is CON used for that is commonplace?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New build

 

Is 'only to resist Stunning' a -1/4 limitation for CON that's already got no figured characteristics?

 

Are CON rolls that common in your campaign? What else is CON used for that is commonplace?

 

"No Figured" is so undercosted for CON in the first place that it's ludicrous. Buy +15 CON for 30 points and get +3 ED, +3 REC, + 8 STUN and +30 END. Remove all those figured characteristics and save a whopping 10 points for giving up 32 points' worth of Figured characteristics. No Figured applied to CON should be worth -2 at a minimum.

 

The stupidity of setting the value of "No Figured" as a flat amount regardless of the characteristic it is applied to is a whole 'nother topic, of course.

[Sean Waters]

Re: New build

 

"No Figured" is so undercosted for CON in the first place that it's ludicrous. Buy +15 CON for 30 points and get +3 ED, +3 REC, + 8 STUN and +30 END. Remove all those figured characteristics and save a whopping 10 points for giving up 32 points' worth of Figured characteristics. No Figured applied to CON should be worth -2 at a minimum.

 

The stupidity of setting the value of "No Figured" as a flat amount regardless of the characteristic it is applied to is a whole 'nother topic, of course.

 

Better yet scrap figured characteristics altogether for a far more transparent costing structure. Hmm. Never going to happen, is it?

 

Anyway, I like the 'staggered' build. Nice one.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: New build

 

Is 'only to resist Stunning' a -1/4 limitation for CON that's already got no figured characteristics?

 

Are CON rolls that common in your campaign? What else is CON used for that is commonplace?

 

 

I run fantasy primarily - so Con rolls do happen on a not infrequent basis. And it could very easily be a -0 - I actually figured it was worth a -1/8, but decided to lean in the direction of the player, due to no figured characteristics being undercosted (for CON, I figure it should be a -1 or so).

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: New build

 

Better yet scrap figured characteristics altogether for a far more transparent costing structure. Hmm. Never going to happen' date=' is it? [/quote']

I used to hate the idea with the passions of a burning sun, but I've come around to, while not necessarily liking it, if that is a change that is made later, I'll go with it.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: New build

 

Glad everyone has liked the idea. It will likely end up in my last Talents article, but this is one I wanted to share with the boards too.

[CorPse]

Re: New build

 

Yes, this is nifty, portable (ie usable in any sort of game) and just plain fun.

[Comic]

Re: New build

 

Yes, I like the idea.

 

More people should have the ability to stagger.

 

You could even name in 'The Jack Sparrow'.

[Trebuchet]

Re: New build

 

I thought about something like this years ago done strictly as a CON roll to avoid being Stunned, but I think your method is probably better because it's more granular - the character can buy exactly as much extra CON as he needs; anything from 5 to 50. I see it as likely more useful for characters with relatively low CON like MA's; most bricks already have the CON to match their defenses.

 

Repped.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: New build

 

Better yet scrap figured characteristics altogether for a far more transparent costing structure.

 

We do that in our high Sci-Fi campaigns when designing alien races. We have done it in a couple of Fantasy games as well. We dabble with changing the formulas for figured a few times, and while it's an easy enough numbers exercise, it's a logistical nightmare....

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: New build

 

I see it as likely more useful for characters with relatively low CON like MA's; most bricks already have the CON to match their defenses.

 

Yeah. I built it for Blackcat - and it was modeled by stuff that I've seen Cap, Bats and the like do.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New build

 

Better yet scrap figured characteristics altogether for a far more transparent costing structure. Hmm. Never going to happen, is it?

 

Anyway, I like the 'staggered' build. Nice one.

 

I used to hate the idea with the passions of a burning sun' date=' but I've come around to, while not necessarily liking it, if that is a change that is made later, I'll go with it.[/quote']

 

I would prefer to see both figured characteristics and "No Figured" recosted so that sellbacks and "no figured" would carry equal value. Howevre, that would require reducing the price of STUN, END and REC (and probably declaring them "defensive characteristics" to mitigate the impact on adjustment powers). I've posted a possible repricing and slight refitting of the Figured rules to accomplish this before.