Decoupling Figured Characteristics

[rjcurrie]

Note: This post originally appeared in thread discussing the costs of characteristics but it got no response in that thread, so I thought I would start a thread for discussing just this point.

 

I have always been in favor of decoupling Primary Characteristics from Figured Characteristics and recosting them appropriately. Note that these are just thoughts and have not been tested nor are they likely to be since I normally only run convention games these days and stick very close to the published rules.

 

        BASE    COST
STR       10       1
DEX       10       3
CON       10       2
BODY      10       2
INT       10       1
EGO       10       2
PRE       10       1
COM       10       1
PD         2       1
ED         2       1
SPD        2      10
REC        5       1
END       30       1
STUN      25       1

 

Notes:

STR stays at 1/1 to keep the balance of 5pts./1d6

 

DEX stays at 3/1 despite losing its SPD contribution because it still offers a lot in terms of what it gives you.

 

CON stays at 2/1 because I think lowering it to 1/1 would result in really high scores and make characters even harder to stun. Perhaps we need to give CON more game effects.

 

BODY stays at 2/1 because of its usefulness.

 

COM goes to 1/1 because I hate 1/2 point costs. I would also want added rules giving COM more real game effects.

 

PD stays at 1/1.

 

ED stays at 1/1.

 

REC goes to 1/1 but I could also see leaving at 2/1 because of its usefulness.

 

SPD stays at 10/1.

 

STUN stays at 1/1.

 

END goes to 1/1 because of the goal of getting rid of 1/2 point costs but I think this is offset by starting at a base of 30.

 

Since these values would drive up the cost of characteristics, I would adjust the starting point values accordingly, probably by about 25 points. That is, a standard superhero would become 375 points (with 225 point base).

[Opal]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

BTW, CON in the table say cost 1. Sounds fine to me, CON will be doing almost nothing under this variant, and while not being stunned is nice, you still get KO'd.

 

Increasing the cost of END really doesn't make much sense to me. I can understand the desire to do way with 1/2 point characteristics, though. One obvious solution is to simply halve the END cost of everything.

 

Actually, that was already done. Most powers that cost END used to cost 1 END/5 Apts. The exception was movement, which cost 1 END per 5" moved. Some genius didn't like that, and rather than base movement on Apts, cut the cost of everything else in half.

 

So you'd just be going back to 3rd edition, in that sense, I suppose.

 

You may also want to do away with ECs under this variant, since they provide a similar sort of cost savings.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

If you abolish figured then why not also abolish CON and have the STUN number be based on BODY+EGO or somesuch?

 

Doc

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

CON does more than just prevent you from being Stunned. I agree with Rod.

 

In fact, I agree with everything Rod proposes, except that I'd leave REC at a base of 4 and a cost of 2, and leave STUN at base 20.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

CON does more than just prevent you from being Stunned. I agree with Rod.

 

I'm missing what other function it has in the game (if you remove figured characteristics....)

[Opal]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

I'm missing what other function it has in the game (if you remove figured characteristics....)

I'm sure there are at least optional mechanics that call for CON rolls, and there are ego powers that can be 'based on CON,' so CON would let you resist - I don't know, a halucenogenic powder or something.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

I'm missing what other function it has in the game (if you remove figured characteristics....)

 

BOECV (Based on CON)?

Also holding your breath.

[JmOz]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

While I am not in favor of this idea (I like figured, but feel that the sell back rules should be examined) I would recomend just getting rid of COM, and folding it into a positive reputation perk

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

Oh, I'd missed that Rod's list still includes COM. Yeah, I'd favor dropping COM in favor of a Perk or Talent as well.

[rjcurrie]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

Oh' date=' I'd missed that Rod's list still includes COM. Yeah, I'd favor dropping COM in favor of a Perk or Talent as well.[/quote']

 

I could live with dropping COM and replacing it with a Perk; however, I prefer it as a Characteristic. After all, what is the difference if you pay 5 (or 10 in my suggested list) points for a COM of 20 or pay 5 points for a Perk: Very Attractive? Actuallly, the fact that Champions had a stat for just how good looking you were was one of the things that I liked about the system from the very beginning.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

I could live with dropping COM and replacing it with a Perk; however' date=' I prefer it as a Characteristic. After all, what is the difference if you pay 5 (or 10 in my suggested list) points for a COM of 20 or pay 5 points for a Perk: Very Attractive? Actuallly, the fact that Champions had a stat for just how good looking you were was one of the things that I liked about the system from the very beginning.[/quote']There's nothing "wrong" with doing it as a CHA. But I think it needs to have a better-defined function in order to be a useful part of the game system. And in defining its effects, I think we'd be almost certain to end up with some variation on "Well, it makes people of the appropriate species/culture/gender/sexual orientation/etc. react more favorably to you." And having people react more favorably to you is exactly what the Reputation Perk is already made to do.

[Kenn]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

While I'm not in favour of this (Figureds make sense to me, sorry) if this were to happen, I'd recommend folding BODY and CON into one characteristic. They both, essentially represent aspects of a person's health. And it makes sense, to me anyway, that your "CON roll" would lessen as your body approached death.

[rjcurrie]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

While I'm not in favour of this (Figureds make sense to me' date=' sorry) if this were to happen, I'd recommend folding BODY and CON into one characteristic. They both, essentially represent aspects of a person's health. And it makes sense, to me anyway, that your "CON roll" would lessen as your body approached death.[/quote']

 

Personally, I see no reason for combining the two stats.

 

As for Figured Characteristics, I think they would work fine if the Hero System was a system in which you purchased a power named "SuperSpeed" that gave you all aspects (based on common thoughts on the subject) of that ability rather than a system where you purchase appropriate components separately to create the effect. If I want a character with a high STR and CON, but a low PD, ED, and REC, I have to jump through hoops by either purchasing one or two of the Primaries with No Figured Characteristics or by buying down more than one Figured Characteristic in violation of the rules. If Figured Characteristics were decoupled, I could simply buy each characteristic at the value I want.

[GamePhil]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

My only problem with a system like this is that now Bricks and other Characteristic-based builds may no longer have the cost savings potential of Power Frameworks. Easily fixed by either selectively removing them (probably just EC) or broadening their scope so they could more easily be used with Characteristics (eg. CON can't go in an EC as long as the "powers should cost END guideline is used).

 

Might not be a problem since there's no Framework in 5th Edition that does not have drawbacks, so other characters sometimes work without them, too.

[Alibear]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

There is nothing stopping a brick lumping Strength in an MP under this model.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

BOECV (Based on CON)?

Also holding your breath.

 

Minor enough that BODY and EGO could take up the slack, I think. Wouldn't even be that much of a jump to say that BODY took on the (Based on CON) resistance to poisons etc. Holding your breath would also make sense with a BODY/EGO mix.

 

I guess its my less is more drive - I think we have too many characteristics and that if there is a move like this to decouple figureds then I think it would not be a bad idea to get rid of COM and CON at the same time.

 

I suppose I'm a bit more radical with regard to characteristics....

 

 

Doc

[rjcurrie]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

Minor enough that BODY and EGO could take up the slack, I think. Wouldn't even be that much of a jump to say that BODY took on the (Based on CON) resistance to poisons etc. Holding your breath would also make sense with a BODY/EGO mix.

 

I guess its my less is more drive - I think we have too many characteristics and that if there is a move like this to decouple figureds then I think it would not be a bad idea to get rid of COM and CON at the same time.

 

I suppose I'm a bit more radical with regard to characteristics....

 

 

Doc

 

I guess part of my problem with combining BODY and CON is that you would suddenly see BODY values in the low twenties like we do with CON now which would make characters even harder to kill or even put in the position of bleeding to death. Not only that, but it would significantly hinder Transform as a Power.

 

Maybe if they were combined and the cost of the combined Characteristic was 3 or 4, it might work. Although then, characters would like end up being stunned left, right, and center.

[GamePhil]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

Nor into an EC, for that matter, since STR costs END. I was more thinking of CON and BODY, which do not and are frequently bought up by such characters. Still, as I said there are drawbacks to EC's, and other character types can't buy Armor (for example) in them, so it probably works out.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

I guess part of my problem with combining BODY and CON is that you would suddenly see BODY values in the low twenties like we do with CON now which would make characters even harder to kill or even put in the position of bleeding to death. Not only that' date=' but it would significantly hinder Transform as a Power.[/quote']

 

That was why I was thinking BODY+EGO - if someone has bought their BODY to 12 or 13 and their EGO to 14 then you get a 27 to add to your STUN number.

 

Maybe if they were combined and the cost of the combined Characteristic was 3 or 4' date=' it might work. Although then, characters would like end up being stunned left, right, and center.[/quote']

 

Might make combats a bit more fun!

 

I dont think I'd combine CON and BODY though - BODY has a solid mechanical game function in counting the character towards death - there may be merits (as pointed out previously) in the character being easier to stun as they creep closer to a death state - makes the whole thing a bit less binary.

 

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

To the issue of COM, making it a perk either means:

 

- you buy it once, so anyone "good looking" (or "hideously ugly") is just as "good looking" (or "hideously ugly") as anyone else with the perk

 

or

 

- you buy it in increments with each having an incremental game effect (presumably bonuses to interaction skills in appropriate circumstances for appearance), so it's not much different from buying a stat.

 

Maybe it should be a Talent based on limited PRE. Then again, maybe all skill levels that do things bonus stat points could have done should just be limited stats. Get rid of Enhanced Perception, for example, and buy +X INT, only for PER rolls.

 

To the issue of fractional costs:

 

You won't get rid of these by changing COM and END. You still have the advantages and limitations system, and some powers (telekinesis, END reserve). If you really want COM and END to cost 1 point, just double the cost of everything.

[Comic]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

I'm still fuzzy on the point of this de-coupling.

 

Is the current coupling so obnoxious, bad, harmful, distracting or distressing?

 

Are you taking the same approach for frameworks -- ie, get rid of them and recost powers?

 

Would the same approach work for attacks -- EB's combine range, targetting, damage, visible special effects, knockdown and knockback, for example -- so each element of every power is separated out and bought individually?

 

How far do you wish this approach to go, and to what end?

 

For me, I'm not enthused by a system were everything must be rebuilt from scratch every time. This would lead, I believe, to a lot more work before ever starting roleplay at all. As well, I doubt it would be good for the overall uniformity of roll play.

[Tonio]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

I'm still fuzzy on the point of this de-coupling.

 

Is the current coupling so obnoxious, bad, harmful, distracting or distressing?

 

Are you taking the same approach for frameworks -- ie, get rid of them and recost powers?

 

Would the same approach work for attacks -- EB's combine range, targetting, damage, visible special effects, knockdown and knockback, for example -- so each element of every power is separated out and bought individually?

 

How far do you wish this approach to go, and to what end?

 

For me, I'm not enthused by a system were everything must be rebuilt from scratch every time. This would lead, I believe, to a lot more work before ever starting roleplay at all. As well, I doubt it would be good for the overall uniformity of roll play.

 

It's not the actual coupling I'm opposed to, it's the default coupling enforcing a specific SFX. STR giving you PD, Leaping, Lifting, Damage, REC, and STUN is based on a specific SFX (physiological musculature). Other SFXs might couple stats differently (one based on mechanical servos might not give you REC or STUN, but give you DEX (or Lightning Reflexes) or SPD, for example). Others might not involve any coupling at all (an internal hydraulics system might give you added Lifting capacity, but none of the other abilities currently coupled with STR).

 

Like all other powers, I feel this coupling should be left up to the character designer, hence there should be no Figureds; players should be free to buy their stats up or down as they wish without default freebies or limitations.

[rjcurrie]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

To the issue of fractional costs:

 

You won't get rid of these by changing COM and END. You still have the advantages and limitations system, and some powers (telekinesis, END reserve). If you really want COM and END to cost 1 point, just double the cost of everything.

 

What I was referring to was things that have a listed cost of 1/2, 1 1/2, etc. There are a few others throughout Powers besides COM and END.

 

The problem with these is that, according to Steve, when you buy something that has a 1/2 point cost, you are supposed to retain and keep track of this 1/2 and not round it off.

 

For example COM 13 costs 1 1/2 points. It is not rounded to 1. If you then buy an extra 5 END for a cost of 2 1/2 points, again it is not rounded to 2. So, you pay a total of 4 points for the COM and END.

 

On the other hand, if you buy a 2d6 EB with a +1/4 Advantage, it works out to 12 1/2 points and you round it down to 12 points.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

Is the current coupling so obnoxious' date=' bad, harmful, distracting or distressing?[/quote']Yes.

 

Having a pre-set coupling enforces particular preconceptions about the SFX of these abilities, and having the value of Figureds based partially on the value of Primaries makes the cost of the Primaries out of whack with the cost of other elements of the system

[archermoo]

Re: Decoupling Figured Characteristics

 

Yes.

 

Having a pre-set coupling enforces particular preconceptions about the SFX of these abilities, and having the value of Figureds based partially on the value of Primaries makes the cost of the Primaries out of whack with the cost of other elements of the system

 

I keep meaning to step into this one, since this is one I feel pretty strongly about, but you keep making my points for me.