Discussion on costs of Characteristics

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

Agree completely

 

 

 

And now the light bulb goes on and I finally understand the disconect. For just about the last 2 decades bricks have used MPs in almost exactly the same ratio as Energy Projectors, so really almost all with only the occasional outlier. So it's not a Bricks have to take MPs, it's a Bricks do take MPs experience

 

That is an interesting point, so I will ask a simple question

 

How common is it for your strong men to use cost savers like MA or MP's

 

also to keep my head on strait if you could mention if you are in the 1:1 or 2:1 camp

 

I am essentialy in the 1:1 camp, and other than things like movement based MP's they have been rare in my games. Martial arts tend to be a bit more common on what would best be called light bricks but are rare on heavy bricks

 

For heroic

Fantasy: MP's are common for spellcasters, but rare to non existant for others, for strong men they are almost never used, MA is slightly more common for strong men (Heavy fighters, barbarians, etc...) but rare, while comon when we get to light fighter types, and somewhere in the middle for medium fighters

 

MOdern: MA are more common, but the strong guy still tends not to have them, MP is used in some games, not so much in others, but again the strong guys avoid them (Normaly they are used for powers if the game includes them, like mental powers or magic)

 

Star: MA are downright Rare for everyone (except for some range MA), MP's tend to be part of some alien abilities, and again mentalists, but otherwise rare

[jtelson]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

I'm in the 2:1 camp.

 

In Heroic Games no one gets power frameworks, many people use Martial Arts, Strong men particularly (We don't play much Fantasy Hero, mostly Modern or Star)

 

In Super Heroic Campaigns nearly all Strong Men use power frameworks, many also use Martial Arts but few buy additional damage classes.

[sbarron]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

Any discussion about what works in one person's game vs. what doesn't work in another person's game is pointless. Everyone has different house rules, and probably more importantly, differing gaming cultures within their groups that go a long way in determining how the game is run.

 

Saying that "1:1 isn't broken, because it works perfectly well in my games," doesn't prove that 1:1 isn't broken. Any more than saying "2:1 works better because it works better in my games," makes it so. Its totally possible that you have house rules or an in-group gaming culture that prevents anything from "being" broken in your game that is totally unrelated to the rules in 5ER themselves.

 

For example, I would never allow a character to have a 70 STR, 35 DEX, 7 SPD, 50% PD/ED damage reduction, 40" of flight, a 45 AP mentalist multipower, and a big honking sword that sucks souls. Why? Because his character concept is basically "uberbad-ass guy." Plus, he's filling about 4 different architypical characters types here. He'd be stepping on several other character's toes, and would generally be difficult to prevent from stealing the spotlight.

 

I don't allow this guy because he's unbalancing to my game, even though he could buy all this stuff as costed in the rule book, all perfectly legal. And my players never make characters like this, because they know a) I wouldn't allow it, and it wouldn't be fun for anyone but the guy who made the uber character.

 

So my game runs perfectly smoothly because I don't allow characters like this. And it has nothing to do with the rules or the costs of stuff what-so-ever.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

This post takes the cake (which is' date=' of course, a lie).[/quote']

I don't know what you mean by this statement. You seem to be agreeing with me with the this part of your post:

 

If str was 2:1, we would probaby not see dozens of "OMG, STR IS TOO EXPENSIVE!!111one" theads, because even at 2:1, you get great value out of your points, better than any EC and possibly even better than most MPs.

 

And for the "build a character" challenge: The built brick is a viable base, you've still got a huge 88 points left to spend, that's more than 20% of base 350 cost. Also, restricting "no HA" and "no MA" is really cheap, as these two things let high STR shine even more.

 

And then the rest of your post just confused me:

And this question was not answered: What is good about str at 1:1?

I didn't answer that question because that wasn't the question I was asked. I never claimed to be attempting to answer it. If you like, I'll answer it now: I happen to think that STR at 1:1 is *not* good, and that the only "good" thing about it is "tradition" - that you don't have to make any changes or conversions of the current published characters.

 

If that's the perfect pricing, why should str not be even cheaper at 0.5:1? If you name anything mathematical which was called for 2:1 vs 1:1, you basically agree that 2:1 would be superior to 1:1.

 

Yeah, you can now make the 3:1 argument, I've not thought that through yet.

This last part completely baffles me. I have only ever argued in support of the 2:1 cost, not any other cost. Not 1:1, not 0.5:1, not 3:1. I don't have a hidden agenda that once everyone is convinced that STR should cost 2, that I'll start clamoring to bump the cost up to 3. 2 is all that's needed.

[Opal]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

That's still a pretty good deal, but - in good hero system fashion - you are paying points for flexibility.

 

90 points spent on STR gets you 189 active points of Attack, movement and characteristics even before you figure in grabbing, lifting and breaking things. Again, the math is incontrovertible:characteristics are the only buy that nets you more active points than the points you spent - and STR gives you more than any other CHA, exaggerating that difference.

Have Elemental Controls been changed in some major way I wasn't aware of? You buy a 60 Apt attack, defense, and movement power in an EC, and you've spent 120 pts and gotten 180 points. The more slots you add, the higher the yield. You can put almost anything in an EC, if your special effect calls for it.

 

Think of Stats as a very restrictive form of EC. You get a good deal, in terms of point savings, but you get a very structured return (less flexibility).

 

 

It's probably not as vital to have figured characteristics in 5th as it used to be. You have more points to throw around, so you can often build an adequately-powered character without resorting to power frameworks or extensive limitations. In earlier versions of the game, building a starting character with competative power generally required you take a power framework, or take a lot of limitations (or a single overall limitation) - or build a simple high CON/STR brick who got his point savings from being characteristic-heavy. You can still take limitations, you can still take power frameworks, you should still be able to build a fairly cheap & simple brick. But, if you don't like it, you could do away with frameworks, perhaps be more restrictive or give smaller breaks for limitations, and do away with the figured characteristics you get from primary characteristics, and the game would still be playable, and simpler.

 

I still wouldn't say go ahead and change the cost of STR. STR is a normal-damage attack power, it should be 5pts/die. But, if you take away the figured characteristics, you've effectively doubled the cost (10 pts of STR gets you 2 REC, 2 PD, and 5 STN - that's 11 points).

[Lucius]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

I think that the perception that Str is a negative point cost is not completly true.

 

Uh…I’m really not sure how to respond to this. Other than to point out that I and others have already done the math in this thread, and I can do it again if you like. Yes, the perception that STR is a negative point cost is completely true.

 

If you say “This is how it is, and it’s good that way” you’re stating an opinion – an opinion I may even come back around to, I’m not wholly committed to any position in this debate.

 

But if you state “This is not how it is” that’s not an opinion, it’s a flat contradiction of facts already in evidence.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary compares it to that time I bought a box of Cheerios marked down to $0.90 because the box had been damaged, and paid with a $1.00 coupon. Yes, I walked out with a dime I hadn't had when I walked into the store.

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

Uh…I’m really not sure how to respond to this. Other than to point out that I and others have already done the math in this thread, and I can do it again if you like. Yes, the perception that STR is a negative point cost is completely true.

 

If you say “This is how it is, and it’s good that way” you’re stating an opinion – an opinion I may even come back around to, I’m not wholly committed to any position in this debate.

 

But if you state “This is not how it is” that’s not an opinion, it’s a flat contradiction of facts already in evidence.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary compares it to that time I bought a box of Cheerios marked down to $0.90 because the box had been damaged, and paid with a $1.00 coupon. Yes, I walked out with a dime I hadn't had when I walked into the store.

 

Simple question: How can you generate more points from strength considering that you can only sell one ability back. The answer is you can't. thus it is not a negative point cost. Unless you consider an EC a negative point cost as well

 

This is why the whole Idea of negative point cost is wrong, If I buy my Str to 15 points I still have spent 5 points, the fact that as part of a bundle deal I have saved points does not mean it cost me negative, just less than if I had bought it each item seperatly, this is very different that a negative point cost. It is not like your cherioes example, it is closer to buying a box set of DVD's, you pay less than if you bought all three serperatly, but the store will not give you money back for picking up the set.

 

Just look at Hal and John

 

Hal

 

30 Green Magic EC

30 40 Str TK

30 12d6 EB

30 30"Flight

30 30/30 FF

30 12/12 FW

---

180 points

 

John

60 40 Str TK

60 12d6 EB

60 30"Flight

60 30/30 FF

60 12/12 FW

----

300 Points

[Opal]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

Simple question: How can you generate more points from strength considering that you can only sell one ability back. The answer is you can't. thus it is not a negative point cost. Unless you consider an EC a negative point cost as well

I think they would consider the EC negative point cost, too. If you have several powers you want to buy, and 'buying' and EC (the control cost) saves you points, that was a negative cost.

 

STR could be legitimately called 'negative cost' up to the point of the figured characteristics it gives you equallying the figured characteristics you wanted - including 'selling back' one of them. I ran into this in 1st Ed. I had a character concept that called for a very high REC, PD, and STN. I built it, then realized that buying more STR would save him points. It's odd to want REC as high as that character had, but STR was 'negative cost' for him.

 

Most of the time, though, I build STR to concept, and let STN and REC fall where it may, so STR is 'positive cost' for me.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

Hal

 

30 Green Magic EC

30 40 Str TK

30 12d6 EB

30 30"Flight

30 30/30 FF

30 12/12 FW

---

180 points

 

John

60 40 Str TK

60 12d6 EB

60 30"Flight

60 30/30 FF

60 12/12 FW

----

300 Points

JmOz, Opal, and others:

 

In the above example, Hal is getting a 40% discount. This is not the same as getting powers for a negative price. And even this discount comes with some restrictions - if someone Drains/Suppresses/Dispels Hal's flight, he loses all those other powers as well.

 

STR is not the same thing at all.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

One idea I've pondered to address the STR issue is to remove STR from the computations for REC and STUN and replace it with EGO.

 

I've always felt EGO was underutilized for it's cost, and thus leads to many many characters being far weaker willed than representative examples from fiction.

[Opal]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

JmOz, Opal, and others:

In the above example, Hal is getting a 40% discount. This is not the same as getting powers for a negative price.

Sure it is. You start out paying 300 points for a set of powers. You spend 30 points on the EC control cost, and you save 120. That's a negative 'cost.'

 

If you want a concrete power for a negative cost, consider a character that buys 3 powers, one at 60 Apts, and two at 50. He buys up two of those powers to 60 so he can put them in an EC with the first. He's bought 20 active points of power for a cost of -40.

 

Similarly, STR is only 'netagive cost' if you've bought the figured characteristics up high enough that buying STR saves you points. If your figured characteristics are already where you want them, STR has a positive cost.

 

For instance, if you're a very-high DCV energy projector with 0 END on your powers, END and STN and even PD don't matter much to you, since you spend little END, rarely get hit - even breaking out of grabs is rarely an issue - and you're not going to sell back the force-field that fits neatly in your power framework, either, just because your PD goes up. STR is very much a positive cost for you, and one that gets you very little utility in return.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

Sure it is. You start out paying 300 points for a set of powers. You spend 30 points on the EC control cost, and you save 120. That's a negative 'cost.'

But each one of those powers is still costing you 30 (positive) points. If you re-work separate powers into an EC to save points, you're "selling back" the benefit of them being separate powers.

 

STR is a very different case.

 

Just look at Achmet and Nunzio

 

Achmet

50 60 STR

0 10 BODY

0 10 CON

0 12 PD

0 14 REC

0 45 STUN

---

50 Points

 

Nunzio

0 10 STR

0 10 BODY

0 10 CON

10 12 PD

20 14 REC

25 45 STUN

33 +10d6 HA

10 +10" Leaping

---

98 Points

 

So start out buying 98 points for a set of abilities, then buy *additional* abilities (extra Grab, Lift, Throw, etc.) and gain back 48 points.

 

When you switch from separate powers to an EC, you're giving up something to save those points. When you switch from HA and the figured chars to STR, you're *gaining* something and also getting back points.

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

But each one of those powers is still costing you 30 (positive) points. If you re-work separate powers into an EC to save points, you're "selling back" the benefit of them being separate powers.

 

STR is a very different case.

 

Just look at Achmet and Nunzio

 

Achmet

50 60 STR

0 10 BODY

0 10 CON

0 12 PD

0 14 REC

0 45 STUN

---

50 Points

 

Nunzio

0 10 STR

0 10 BODY

0 10 CON

10 12 PD

20 14 REC

25 45 STUN

33 +10d6 HA

10 +10" Leaping

---

98 Points

 

So start out buying 98 points for a set of abilities, then buy *additional* abilities (extra Grab, Lift, Throw, etc.) and gain back 48 points.

 

When you switch from separate powers to an EC, you're giving up something to save those points. When you switch from HA and the figured chars to STR, you're *gaining* something and also getting back points.

 

Sorry it does not hold water, if it helps you to visualize it, imagine you are getting everything strength provides you with a 75% discound for the package (like EC gives 50%, reasonable considering STR is a lock on what you can get) plus "Str effects" + a control cost

 

Cost Element

12.5 Control cost

12.5 points for str effects (Str rolls, grabs, etc...)

2.25 PD

5 REC

6.25 Stun

8.25 HA

2.5 leaping

---

49.25 Points

 

 

Each thing is being paid for, but then it is being packaged together and charged one cost

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

I edited the numbers above to include decimals so to reduce round off error

[Kenn]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

35 2d6 Energy Blast, Attack vs Limited Defense: mental defense (+1 1/2), Line of Sight(+1/2), Indirect(+1/4), Invisible Power Effects(+1/4)

5 Mental Awareness

-----

40 pts.

 

20 2d6 Ego Attack

-----

20 pts.

 

So is the Ego Attack costing "negative points" too?

 

Since STR is to cheap, and martial arts are too cheap, and Ego Attack are too cheap, maybe its just the cost of Energy Blast that's too high.

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

this conversation has however done one thing for me, it has made me question the appropriateness of being allowed to sell back Figured characteristics

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

35 2d6 Energy Blast, Attack vs Limited Defense: mental defense (+1 1/2), Line of Sight(+1/2), Indirect(+1/4), Invisible Power Effects(+1/4)

5 Mental Awareness

-----

40 pts.

 

20 2d6 Ego Attack

-----

20 pts.

 

So is the Ego Attack costing "negative points" too?

 

Since STR is to cheap, and martial arts are too cheap, and Ego Attack are too cheap, maybe its just the cost of Energy Blast that's too high.

 

IIRC in 4th EB had some special advantages to it, like spreading, that 5th has opened the door to other ranged attacks having. I wonder at times like this if that may have been a bad idea, as it devalued EB

[Kenn]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

IIRC in 4th EB had some special advantages to it' date=' like spreading, that 5th has opened the door to other ranged attacks having. I wonder at times like this if that may have been a bad idea, as it devalued EB[/quote']

 

You know, I was just being snarky about Energy Blast being overpriced (being, as I am in the 1:1 camp anyway), but I think you may have a legitimate point. The ability to spread the attack used to be reserved to Energy Blast was one of the extra values of the power.

 

Then again a lot of my players don't know you can now spread killing attacks or ego blasts or what have you.

 

I think my group is playing 4 1/2 Edition Hero.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

Sorry it does not hold water, if it helps you to visualize it, imagine you are getting everything strength provides you with a 75% discound for the package (like EC gives 50%, reasonable considering STR is a lock on what you can get) plus "Str effects" + a control cost

 

Cost Element

12.5 Control cost

12.5 points for str effects (Str rolls, grabs, etc...)

2.25 PD

5 REC

6.25 Stun

8.25 HA

2.5 leaping

---

49.25 Points

 

 

Each thing is being paid for, but then it is being packaged together and charged one cost

 

Very neat calculation. However...

 

This argument holds water if, and only if, you wouldn't be buying up the characteristics and abilities anyway. PD, you'd buy up, no question in my mind, so why should you get a discount there? Damage, you'd buy up, ditto.

 

Strength effects, well, yes - the character is supposed to be strong.

 

REC and STUN. Probably, unless you are buying a fast brick who plans not to get hit much. Maybe not worth 100% value, but surely worth far more than 25%.

 

Leaping. Maybe. Maybe not, entirely down to concept, but probably less likely if it was not at a big discount.

 

So over half the abilities, and well over half the points are something you'd be buying anyway, and the fact that you buy them as a package is not inconveniencing you at all. 75% is a huge, huge discount for something you'll be getting anyway.

 

It is like saying that ECs should grant a 75% discount for characters that take EB/FF/Flight, because it is a really common construct. I'm not seeing that.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

35 2d6 Energy Blast, Attack vs Limited Defense: mental defense (+1 1/2), Line of Sight(+1/2), Indirect(+1/4), Invisible Power Effects(+1/4)

5 Mental Awareness

-----

40 pts.

 

20 2d6 Ego Attack

-----

20 pts.

 

So is the Ego Attack costing "negative points" too?

 

Since STR is to cheap, and martial arts are too cheap, and Ego Attack are too cheap, maybe its just the cost of Energy Blast that's too high.

 

The ego attack probably costs more than that as you have only used low levels of indirect and IPE, but then Hero is designed to make building things one way more expensive than building them another.

 

4d6 EB BOECV: 40 points Mental awareness 5 points

4d6 Ego attack: visible (-1/4) 32 points

 

So we are down to a much closer ratio.

 

Start adding, say, 0 END, and the points go to 55/48. Very close.

 

That's one of the problems with this argument, like statistics, you can probably make the numbers say anything you like. Add more advantages, and the Ego Blast starts costing more than the EB.

 

I don't think (prove me wrong, please) that ANYONE is suggesting that strength is not too cheap IF you compare utility to, say EB, or take into consideration the other advantages you get for the points.

 

I'm pretty sure the argument is now that there are balancing factors in the rest of the system.

 

If that's right, I'm pretty sure it implies that if the cost of strength was pitched correctly for the utility, we needn't have all thes balances elsewhere, and we'd wind up with a more transparent and easily used system.

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

Very neat calculation. However...

 

This argument holds water if, and only if, you wouldn't be buying up the characteristics and abilities anyway. PD, you'd buy up, no question in my mind, so why should you get a discount there? Damage, you'd buy up, ditto.

 

Strength effects, well, yes - the character is supposed to be strong.

 

REC and STUN. Probably, unless you are buying a fast brick who plans not to get hit much. Maybe not worth 100% value, but surely worth far more than 25%.

 

Leaping. Maybe. Maybe not, entirely down to concept, but probably less likely if it was not at a big discount.

 

So over half the abilities, and well over half the points are something you'd be buying anyway, and the fact that you buy them as a package is not inconveniencing you at all. 75% is a huge, huge discount for something you'll be getting anyway.

 

It is like saying that ECs should grant a 75% discount for characters that take EB/FF/Flight, because it is a really common construct. I'm not seeing that.

 

The point of that was to illustrate that you are still paying for each element. the whole Negative point thing being false. Specificaly in response to things like

 

Uh…I’m really not sure how to respond to this. Other than to point out that I and others have already done the math in this thread, and I can do it again if you like. Yes, the perception that STR is a negative point cost is completely true.

 

If you say “This is how it is, and it’s good that way” you’re stating an opinion – an opinion I may even come back around to, I’m not wholly committed to any position in this debate.

 

But if you state “This is not how it is” that’s not an opinion, it’s a flat contradiction of facts already in evidence.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary compares it to that time I bought a box of Cheerios marked down to $0.90 because the box had been damaged, and paid with a $1.00 coupon. Yes, I walked out with a dime I hadn't had when I walked into the store.

 

 

Now is str a good deal, I am not going to debate THAT, of course it is, is it extremly good deal for bricks, umm well, umm YAH. But the question is: is it worth 2:1 when compared to other cost savers like EC's, MP's, & MA?

 

AS per specific things: all of your things you comment on are assuming a tank, but what about a archer in a fantacy game, or a soldier fighting aliens in a star hero. Will Strength be as useful to them? By your own admitance this argument holds water IF you wouldn't be buying up the characteristics and abilities anyway, well for the majority of characters it is doubtful that they would want all of them, even a lot of Strong guy types in heroic games (Fantasy I would say is an exception). Some will Min/Max it I'm sure, but that will happen at any level. But of course a tank will want most of them, so it becomes a weird situation that for the majority of characters it is priced right, but for the character who is concentrated on it it is priced wrong. Which is probably the point of NCM, does not solve the problem in Champions, but then Champions in some ways is more forgiving in my mind to this issue

[Sean Waters]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

One idea I've pondered to address the STR issue is to remove STR from the computations for REC and STUN and replace it with EGO.

 

I've always felt EGO was underutilized for it's cost, and thus leads to many many characters being far weaker willed than representative examples from fiction.

 

 

EGO is a defence to PRE attacks.

 

EGO is a defence to mental attacks, both in terms of making it harder to affect you in the first place and, for everything but Ego Attack, reducing the effect of the power AND making it easier to break out.

 

EGO helps you overcome psychological limtiations and resist physical or psychological torment.

 

EGO allows you to push.

 

In many heroic games, with lowish PRE attacks and no mental powers, it is probably not worth the cost. In superheroic games, or, say Cthulu type games, games where magic exists etc it is.

 

I think using it for REC and STUN might be OK for some games, but it is not a general change I'd consdier. Mind you, I'm not keen on figured characteristics anyway, so I'm not exactly unbiased.

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

EGO is a defence to PRE attacks.

 

EGO is a defence to mental attacks, both in terms of making it harder to affect you in the first place and, for everything but Ego Attack, reducing the effect of the power AND making it easier to break out.

 

EGO helps you overcome psychological limtiations and resist physical or psychological torment.

 

EGO allows you to push.

 

In many heroic games, with lowish PRE attacks and no mental powers, it is probably not worth the cost. In superheroic games, or, say Cthulu type games, games where magic exists etc it is.

 

I think using it for REC and STUN might be OK for some games, but it is not a general change I'd consdier. Mind you, I'm not keen on figured characteristics anyway, so I'm not exactly unbiased.

 

 

WHICH is exactly the stuff I want to see talked about in the main book. In a normal Heroic game like you were talking about Ego should probably be 1:1, with mental powers being the real determinator, again assuming the whole system is being used 2:1 is about right, but lots of games cut things out, and I really want to see a good discusion on the issues

[Sean Waters]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

The point of that was to illustrate that you are still paying for each element. the whole Negative point thing being false. Specificaly in response to things like

 

 

 

Now is str a good deal, I am not going to debate THAT, of course it is, is it extremly good deal for bricks, umm well, umm YAH. But the question is: is it worth 2:1 when compared to other cost savers like EC's, MP's, & MA?

 

AS per specific things: all of your things you comment on are assuming a tank, but what about a archer in a fantacy game, or a soldier fighting aliens in a star hero. Will Strength be as useful to them? By your own admitance this argument holds water IF you wouldn't be buying up the characteristics and abilities anyway, well for the majority of characters it is doubtful that they would want all of them, even a lot of Strong guy types in heroic games (Fantasy I would say is an exception). Some will Min/Max it I'm sure, but that will happen at any level. But of course a tank will want most of them, so it becomes a weird situation that for the majority of characters it is priced right, but for the character who is concentrated on it it is priced wrong. Which is probably the point of NCM, does not solve the problem in Champions, but then Champions in some ways is more forgiving in my mind to this issue

 

I take the point, but in heroic games you probably are not going to exceed 20 STR that often.

 

That gives you (assuming no other characteristic increases) a PD of 4, a REC of 6 and a stun of 25. The only way we can really do a meaninful comparison is to go through a bunc of star hero/fantasy/whatever characters and see what proportion have a PD of 4+, a REC of 6+ and a stun of 25+, even if they don't have a 20 STR.

 

Even that is not a proper test because we are prejudiced by the template the game imposes on us.

 

A true test would be to change character generation so that all primary and secondary characteristics start at ZERO and no characteristic is figured, then see where people spend their points, and if, given a free choice, they wuold buy pd. REC and Stun past their (current) default levels. Even then the cost of characteristics is a real issue.

 

Mind you I'd suggest that pd will almost always be bought up, just to allow the characters to survive, and Stun for the same reason. REC is more difficult to predict, as it has less direct impact on combat.

 

Thing is we are all reasonably convinced of our own visions.

 

Perhaps a truer test, given the current situation, is to ask how many people buy DOWN their enhanced PD, REC and STUN. not that many, I suspect, which is a good indicator they want them at that level anyway.

[JmOz]

Re: Discussion on costs of Characteristics

 

I have a habit of selling back stun or endurance, not so much recovery (I tend to ignore Rec, in both directions)

 

As for PD, while I normaly buy it up, the method of doing so changes (armor, ff, etc...)