8pt CSL

[Alibear]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

I wouldn't say useless but Dex is more useful. However, there comes a time in most characters career's that the player has to say enough is enough.

 

My longest running character topped out at 35 dex. He also has 2 overall, 2 all combat, 2 HTH combat levels and 2dcv levels tied to his acrobatics.(a hangover from earlier edition I know)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

I have a problem with the idea of "concept overrideing cost effective builds"

 

In my experience you start to see characters like the Midnighter from the Authority over characters like Batman, characters who have some weird excuse to have the more effective build. I'm not saying every player is this way, just my experience says that it happens more than it does not. Also in game play if one character is built "cost effective" and another is built "By concept" it can cause some issues, this last point is not saying one is better than the other, just that mixing the two can cause problems,

 

***you must spread rep around...***

 

I agree with your premise. The answer should not be "build a less efficient character because it is in concept". The answer should be "the system should support every concept appropriately". If two characters are exactly equally effective, they should have exactly the same cost. If two characters are approximately equally effective, they should have approximately the same cost.

 

The existence of NCM makes pricing skill levels difficult, to say the least. With no NCM, we look at 8 point skill levels and say "why? I can buy +3 DEX for 9 points, and sell back the SPD to make it 6 points". But they are much more cost-competetive in an NCM game, where even selling back SPD makes that +3 DEX cost 15 points. OK, for +1 point, I can buy 2 combat levels. I sacrifice the other benefits of DEX, but I get the ability to enhance my damage, have +2 DCV or have +2 OCV, rather than locking in +1 OCV and +1 DCV. That's a lot better balanced. If we lower the cost of 8 point levels, they are underpriced in an NCM environment.

 

Does the game work? In my view, yes. In a Heroic game, characters are lead to buy skills and skill levels. And skills are very important in heroic games. In a superheroic game, it's more effective to buy powers and stats. And skills tend to be less of the focus in superheroic games.

 

In a Supers game, I would allow a character who is "a combat expert" to buy up his DEX to reflect this. If it's out of concept for him to gain DEX skill enhancements in this regard (and many such characters are also expert in such skills, so it may not be), slap on a limitation "no enhancement of DEX skills". Add in "no figured" if it makes you feel better. Now it's a power.

 

The true weakness here, in my opinion, is allowing stats with limitations to circumvent the NCM limits. Slap the same "no DEX enhancement" or even "no figured" on that DEX, and suddenly our 20 DEX Heroic character can have +10 DEX for OCV and DCV without the NCM cap. My solution is simple: limited characteristics that top NCM are still doubled in cost. Yes, they are powers. But they are still characteristics, so they still suffer from the doubled cost of characteristics in excess of NCM.

 

NFW should Hercules pay 40 points to have a 35 STR when Samson gets it for 22 by purchasing +10 STR, +15 STR "not if hair cut (-1/4). That effectively converts his -1/4 limitation to a - 1 1/2 limitation. Technically, even if you decide "not if hair cut" is a -0 limitation, his STR is still a power, so no NCM - 25 points.

 

More contrived excuses to buy the characteristic as a power rather than a stat.

[Vondy]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

Alot of truth in that...8 point CSL's are almost useless to me' date=' but 10 pointers, oh those are sweet[/quote']

 

IMNSHO: in a game where overall levels are allowed there is almost no reason to purchase an 8-point level due to their efficiency. On the other hand, I don't always build characters just to be efficient. I do think building to concept is a valid consideration. Efficiency and concept need to be balanced. I understand many people look for efficient concepts, but from my perspective, thats a limiting, gamist way of coming up with what options you give yourself in terms of the characters you play. Some genres and groups won't let you out of that - and the GM is key in this - so you have to go for efficiency to be successful, but that's not always the case. I tend to play for character, story, and world more than "beat the scenario" (though I certainly want to win), which is neither here nor there in terms of preferences. I hate waste on a character as much as the next guy, but I define waste a little differently. If it makes sense to build the character a certain way I build him that way even if it might be a few points cheaper to do it another way. One good example is skill levels versus dex. On the other hand, I almost invariably play heroic genres, which are more forgiving - and sometimes provide more utility for skill levels.

[Paragon]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

I have a problem with the idea of "concept overrideing cost effective builds"

 

 

I'm quite there with you, but I suspect any elaboration I'd make on the matter would simply annoy someone to no good purpose.

[Paragon]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

IMNSHO: in a game where overall levels are allowed there is almost no reason to purchase an 8-point level due to their efficiency. On the other hand' date=' I don't always build characters just to be efficient. I do think building to concept is a valid consideration. Efficiency and concept need to be balanced. I understand many people look for efficient concepts, but from my perspective, thats a limiting, gamist way of coming up with what options you give yourself in terms of the characters you play. [/quote']

 

The problem is that as long as you're working on a limited resource (i.e. a point budget) even with concept firmly in mind, you can't afford to ignore efficiency, as few people can trivially fit the concept into whatever resource is at hand; at that point you're stuck with the following question: Do I build to efficiency and actually get a character who can mostly do what they should do for the concept, or do I build to concept purely mechanically, and have to sacrifice abilities the character is supposed to have? I submit the latter is not a conceptually sounder way to build even when focused on concept first.

 

The only way one can say to the contrary is either if one's concepts tend to come in below point easily, or if one doesnt' consider what a character can accomplish part of concept, and I'm extremely dubious that the latter is true of most people.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

I'm not saying cost effectiveness isn't good. I'm just saying that sometimes more DEX makes no sense beyond a Cost Effective Standpoint and at that point CSLs are usually what you want.

 

I just think it's as bad a sin to ignore Concept over Cost Effectiveness as it is to ignore Cost Effectiveness over Concept. There is a happy medium in there and from my play experience the system is pretty close to it when things are costed out.

 

Though personally I'm a fan of 3 and 5 pt CSLs mixed with PSLs instead of just strait 8pt CSLs.

[Paragon]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

I'm not saying cost effectiveness isn't good. I'm just saying that sometimes more DEX makes no sense beyond a Cost Effective Standpoint and at that point CSLs are usually what you want.

 

I just think it's as bad a sin to ignore Concept over Cost Effectiveness as it is to ignore Cost Effectiveness over Concept. There is a happy medium in there and from my play experience the system is pretty close to it when things are costed out.

 

Though personally I'm a fan of 3 and 5 pt CSLs mixed with PSLs instead of just strait 8pt CSLs.

 

Well, I've wrapped a character around 8 point CSLs myself in the past (he had ten of them and a base CV of 5); I'm just suggesting that in the vast majority of cases, unless you want the damage potential or the way campaign caps are set up it allows you to do something you otherwise couldn't (in Steve Perrin's houserules, for example, CV is capped "on average", so levels allow you to gust at the OCV or DCV end when the situation warrents in a way you couldn't with simply steady state CV), they're almost always a loser in cost-to-value.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

The thing about CSLs is that they can be creatively divided.

 

A boost to OCV, DCV and Damage if you have enough to go around. Though admittedly in my experience a lot of gamers tend to put them all in one place at a time.

[Paragon]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

The thing about CSLs is that they can be creatively divided.

 

A boost to OCV, DCV and Damage if you have enough to go around. Though admittedly in my experience a lot of gamers tend to put them all in one place at a time.

 

Even without spreading they can be useful if the campaign caps permit varied use of them. Though it wouldn't work as well in 5th (since you lose your action if you carry over a defense action to the top of your phase), Striker, the character I mentioned earlier, often aborted into Martial Dodge; with his base CV of 5, 5 more from the martial dodge, and the ten levels, not much could hit him when he did that, barring ego attacks or areas. It was a defeatable tactic of course (if you Held he had to attack sometime if he was going to get anything done) but it could provide him some pretty impressive defense, beyond what he'd have been able to manage with straight DCV. The inverse was also sometimes true, when some opponent was on their last legs and throwing all his levels into offense was risky, but rewarding because he carried an autofire weapon.

 

Its just that you pretty much do need to have a build and use the tactics to get value out of them.

[Bloodstone]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

A boost to OCV' date=' DCV and Damage if you have enough to go around. Though admittedly in my experience a lot of gamers tend to put them all in one place at a time.[/quote']

 

Agreed. Too often I see people dump all their CSL's into one place, completely ignoring the math behind assigning those levels.

 

Of course, I suck at math so I often can't figure these things out on the fly without using the computer or looking at a chart...

[Hyper-Man]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

The one combat related thing that 8pt CSL's do NOT apply to (without a houserule) is the optional maneuver Dive For Cover.

 

*DFC is based on a DEX roll so only Skill Levels with the appropriate movement or Overall Levels can be applied to it.

[casualplayer]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

People who champion efficiency over concept would have had Strider or Boromir carry The One Ring because they are clearly superior. They would have been corrupted by power, epically failed and Sauron would have won.

 

If you don't put some effort into accomodating the less-optimized in your games you end up with a party of Conan, Son of Conan, Conan with a goatee, She-Conan and Fafhrd.

 

Aside from seconding the layover point of the 8pt level as you are evolving a 5 pt'er into an Overall one and the huge benefit of being able to use levels for increasing damage, it isn't a cost-effective buy. Whether that is even a concern, therein lies the rub.

[JmOz]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

People who champion efficiency over concept would have had Strider or Boromir carry The One Ring because they are clearly superior. They would have been corrupted by power, epically failed and Sauron would have won.

 

If you don't put some effort into accomodating the less-optimized in your games you end up with a party of Conan, Son of Conan, Conan with a goatee, She-Conan and Fafhrd.

 

Aside from seconding the layover point of the 8pt level as you are evolving a 5 pt'er into an Overall one and the huge benefit of being able to use levels for increasing damage, it isn't a cost-effective buy. Whether that is even a concern, therein lies the rub.

 

Wow I so disagree with this. Both Concept and effectiveness has there place, and it really is the mixing of the two that causes problems, that is to say when some characters are SIGNIFICANTLY more competent (overall, not in specifics) than others. Also, and I am probably reading into it some, but your use of two fantacy examples makes me think you are coming from a overall heroic viewpoint, my viewpoint tends towards the superheroic, where difference in power levels can be alot wider, and thus more destructive to the enjoyment of all.

[casualplayer]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

Wow I so disagree with this. Both Concept and effectiveness has there place' date=' and it really is the mixing of the two that causes problems, that is to say when some characters are SIGNIFICANTLY more competent (overall, not in specifics) than others. Also, and I am probably reading into it some, but your use of two fantacy examples makes me think you are coming from a overall heroic viewpoint, my viewpoint tends towards the superheroic, where difference in power levels can be alot wider, and thus more destructive to the enjoyment of all.[/quote']

 

Effectiveness is defined by the campaign environment. The more wargame-y the campaign is the more weighted damage dealing, accuracy and resiliency are and the more important it is to wring every bit of combat value out of that character point.

 

I could just as easily have used Wolverine, X-23, Sabretooth, Venom and Deadpool as my examples of the Optimized Player Group. Aside from that, if everyone seated is having a good time it's a good game.

[JmOz]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

People who champion efficiency over concept would have had Strider or Boromir carry The One Ring because they are clearly superior. They would have been corrupted by power, epically failed and Sauron would have won.

 

If you don't put some effort into accomodating the less-optimized in your games you end up with a party of Conan, Son of Conan, Conan with a goatee, She-Conan and Fafhrd.

 

Aside from seconding the layover point of the 8pt level as you are evolving a 5 pt'er into an Overall one and the huge benefit of being able to use levels for increasing damage, it isn't a cost-effective buy. Whether that is even a concern, therein lies the rub.

 

GOing back, because I suspect I have found the disconect I am having with what you are saying, and this is a test on that hypothisis before I say something that is wrong headed

 

How in your opinion are Strider or Boromir "clearly superior"?

[Vondy]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

I'm not saying cost effectiveness isn't good. I'm just saying that sometimes more DEX makes no sense beyond a Cost Effective Standpoint and at that point CSLs are usually what you want.

 

I just think it's as bad a sin to ignore Concept over Cost Effectiveness as it is to ignore Cost Effectiveness over Concept. There is a happy medium in there and from my play experience the system is pretty close to it when things are costed out.

 

Though personally I'm a fan of 3 and 5 pt CSLs mixed with PSLs instead of just strait 8pt CSLs.

 

Well said on all counts. Its an issue of balancing effeciency and concept in my mind. It takes time and experience to hit on the correct balance.

[Paragon]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

People who champion efficiency over concept would have had Strider or Boromir carry The One Ring because they are clearly superior. They would have been corrupted by power, epically failed and Sauron would have won.

 

 

This is a narrow definition of efficiency that fails in the field. Since efficiency in this context would have meant no such thing would have happened; they'd have found the best combination of resistance to the ring's affects and ability to hang onto it and given it to _them. Strider might have been a possibility, but no one concerned about things would have given it to Boromir.

 

You can argue they'd still have failed, but in a game, unlike a book, one can't assume the author is on your side and aim at the longshot if you want to get things done.

 

(I never cease to be amazed at the people who's concept of power gamers have apparently been shaped by encounters with stupid ones, or who somehow think its not possible to combine the trait with caring about other aspects of the character.)

[casualplayer]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

This is a narrow definition of efficiency that fails in the field. Since efficiency in this context would have meant no such thing would have happened; they'd have found the best combination of resistance to the ring's affects and ability to hang onto it and given it to _them. Strider might have been a possibility, but no one concerned about things would have given it to Boromir.

 

You can argue they'd still have failed, but in a game, unlike a book, one can't assume the author is on your side and aim at the longshot if you want to get things done.

 

(I never cease to be amazed at the people who's concept of power gamers have apparently been shaped by encounters with stupid ones, or who somehow think its not possible to combine the trait with caring about other aspects of the character.)

 

It's not a 'definition' at all. I didn't say 'exclude concept entirely, bwah-ha-ha, munchkin uber alles;' I said 'champion.' Should I have said 'favor' or 'prefer' or something else to keep the rhetoricometer from being turned up to 11?

 

I'll not deride your snide aside. If I was out of line earlier I'm sure someone I respect will let me know.

[casualplayer]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

GOing back, because I suspect I have found the disconect I am having with what you are saying, and this is a test on that hypothisis before I say something that is wrong headed

 

How in your opinion are Strider or Boromir "clearly superior"?

 

Lemme think about it and PM you. Getting a Skill Level discussion locked would be ridiculous and I want to back away to see if the antagonism is justified. Truly appreciate that you did the same, JmOz.

[Kdansky]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

If my "great fighter, but kinda clumsy" concept has to cost way more points to do the same as the "high dex", then either my concept is bad, or the points are off. He should actually be cheaper, since he's clumsy.

Now I would go the creative route and buy limited dex ("only for combat things").

[JmOz]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

If my "great fighter, but kinda clumsy" concept has to cost way more points to do the same as the "high dex", then either my concept is bad, or the points are off. He should actually be cheaper, since he's clumsy.

Now I would go the creative route and buy limited dex ("only for combat things").

 

Or a physical disad (Clumsy out of combat, 10 points...)

[Tigereye]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

Having played a "normal" for over a year now, I think I'll put in my tuppence worth.

 

I have an 8-point CSL, which is almost as useful as my 10-point overall. I could argue even more useful, as I use it in combat for my character all the time.

 

My character uses "cascading" CSLs, as follows:

 

2 pts: +1 with Pistol

3 pts: +1 with 3 skills (in this case, Stealth, Bugging, and Security Systems)

5 pts: +1 with Ranged Combat

6 points: +2 with 3 skills (Gambling, High Society, Seduction)

8 points: +1 with All Combat

10 points: +1 Overall Level

 

It fits well into the character concept, as I have to constantly figure out where to put the SLs (DCV? OCV? ECV? What if I'm trying to seduce somebody while trying not to get hit?)

 

I like the idea because I have to think as a player. Sure, I'd probably be better off spending the points and just boosting the relevant stats (EGO, DEX, INT, and PRE) but I wouldn't have nearly as much fun.

[JmOz]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

Having played a "normal" for over a year now, I think I'll put in my tuppence worth.

 

I have an 8-point CSL, which is almost as useful as my 10-point overall. I could argue even more useful, as I use it in combat for my character all the time.

 

My character uses "cascading" CSLs, as follows:

 

2 pts: +1 with Pistol

3 pts: +1 with 3 skills (in this case, Stealth, Bugging, and Security Systems)

5 pts: +1 with Ranged Combat

6 points: +2 with 3 skills (Gambling, High Society, Seduction)

8 points: +1 with All Combat

10 points: +1 Overall Level

 

It fits well into the character concept, as I have to constantly figure out where to put the SLs (DCV? OCV? ECV? What if I'm trying to seduce somebody while trying not to get hit?)

 

I like the idea because I have to think as a player. Sure, I'd probably be better off spending the points and just boosting the relevant stats (EGO, DEX, INT, and PRE) but I wouldn't have nearly as much fun.

 

Only thing I see in that from a point efficincy POV is that I would upgrade the all combat for another Overall, while removing one of the 3 skills, I would probably drop one fo the PRE Based ones, as I can see some use for the sneaky ones combined with the combat ones...

[Kdansky]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

I would replace that with:

 

3 overall levels: 30 pts

1 3cp level (with pistol combat): 3

total 33

 

(your combination: 34)

 

- gives you a tiny bit more combat value (with your weapon it's the same, but you get 1 more ocv for all maneuvers and you get 3 instead of 2 for all weapons and styles).

- stealth skills 2 higher, social skills 1 better

- some other minor advantages

 

- the only disadvantage: If you want to seduce and have a high DCV at the same time, you only get +3 total instead of your +2/+2. I can life with that I think

 

The problem of your layout: You buy different 3 point levels (that's already 6 points) and then add some 5 pointers, bringing the total to 11. You can just get an overall at that point.

[jtelson]

Re: 8pt CSL

 

the only disadvantage: If you want to seduce and have a high DCV at the same time' date=' you only get +3 total instead of your +2/+2. I can life with that I think [/quote']

 

So in the Batman vs. Catwoman fight from Batman Returns or most early fights in Mr. and Mrs. Smith, you'd be at a disadvantage; Otherwise smooth sailing.