Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

4d6 Aid' date=' Any one characteristic (+1/4), Fade Rate 5 points per year (+2 - reset to whatever the +2 advantage level is), Costs END (-1/2) 10x END (-4 1/2), Extra Time (say the -1 1/2 level, which I think isn't that long), Gestures throughout (-1/2) Incantations throughout (-1/2), Concentrate 0 DCV throughout (-1), OAF (-1), AP 130; RP 14.[/quote']

Don't mean to nitpick, but usually Gestures and Incantations are not used in Superhero games, and 10xEND is only -4. So you'd need an additional -1.5. Let's say you add that to the Extra Time. And the +2 fade rate would be 5/month. Now it takes 1 hour and 130 END per use. Let's say you add to your own END first, and the GM is generous and allows the END to be added before you spend it. An average roll will get you +28 END. Let's assume you had 60 END to begin with, so now you have 88 END, and you've spent all of it, and 21d6 of your STUN as END. Let's assume you started with 60 STUN. You've just burnt 73 STUN on an average roll, and you're now at -13. You'll wake up in a little while and assuming you've got a 20 REC, you can be back up to 60 STUN and 88 REC in about a minute. Then you take another hour to max out your END. You're now at 108 END and still have to burn 11d6 STUN as END, but at least it won't knock you out. Then recover your END and STUN again in a few phases. Then do the same thing to your STUN, taking another 2 hours, then 2 hours more for your REC. By the time you've maxed out all 14 of your stats, you've spent 28 hours at 0 DCV concentrating, and probably several more minutes at 0 DCV recovering or being unconscious. And unless you have some life support, you also need to eat and sleep. How many teammates do you have to buff up? 5? That'd be another 140 hours of your "labor". That comes to about 11 days of waking hours. The villain has completely levelled the city by this time. Or perhaps some other hero has stepped in while you were fooling around and gotten the job done himself. And in 19 more days, you get to start the process over again (though it won't take quite as long this time, because you'll only have lost 5 points off of each characteristic, so it'll only take about 5 days).

 

Villain: "As I track the activity of the Super Team, it seems they are inactive for the first five days of every month. So I'll carry out my evil plot on the first through the fifth! Mbwahahahaha!"

[Old Man]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

Does Phil know what forum he's in?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

Don't mean to nitpick' date=' but usually Gestures and Incantations are not used in Superhero games, and 10xEND is only -4.* So you'd need an additional -1.5.* Let's say you add that to the Extra Time.* And the +2 fade rate would be 5/month.* Now it takes 1 hour and 130 END per use.* Let's say you add to your own END first, and the GM is generous and allows the END to be added before you spend it.* An average roll will get you +28 END.* Let's assume you had 60 END to begin with, so now you have 88 END, and you've spent all of it, and 21d6 of your STUN as END.* Let's assume you started with 60 STUN.* You've just burnt 73 STUN on an average roll, and you're now at -13.* You'll wake up in a little while and assuming you've got a 20 REC, you can be back up to 60 STUN and 88 REC in about a minute.* Then you take another hour to max out your END.* You're now at 108 END and still have to burn 11d6 STUN as END, but at least it won't knock you out.* Then recover your END and STUN again in a few phases.* Then do the same thing to your STUN, taking another 2 hours, then 2 hours more for your REC.* By the time you've maxed out all 14 of your stats, you've spent 28 hours at 0 DCV concentrating, and probably several more minutes at 0 DCV recovering or being unconscious.* And unless you have some life support, you also need to eat and sleep.* How many teammates do you have to buff up?* 5?* That'd be another 140 hours of your "labor".* That comes to about 11 days of waking hours.* The villain has completely levelled the city by this time.* Or perhaps some other hero has stepped in while you were fooling around and gotten the job done himself.* And in 19 more days, you get to start the process over again (though it won't take quite as long this time, because you'll only have lost 5 points off of each characteristic, so it'll only take about 5 days).Villain: "As I track the activity of the Super Team, it seems they are inactive for the first five days of every month.* So I'll carry out my evil plot on the first through the fifth!* Mbwahahahaha!"[/quote']

Does Phil know what forum he's in?*

Apparently not.* Still, we can fine tune.* How about:

 

5d6 Aid, Any One Characteristic (+1/4), Fade Monthly (+2) (162 AP), Concentrate: 0 DCV throughout (-1), Costs END (-1/2), 3x END (-1), Extra Time 1 hour (-3), OAF (-1), Incant throughout (-1/2), 2 handed gestures throughout (-1), Gradual Effect (6 hours; -1 1/2) 15 RP.

 

So that will require, on average, 28 castings per character in the group to be at +30 STR, +10 DEX, +15 CON, +15 BOD, +30 INT, +15 Ego, +30 PRE, +60 COM, +15 PD, +15 ED, +15 REC, +3 SPD, +30 STUN and +60 END. Eveb without the base stats, those are pretty good characters in a fantasy game.

 

Five characters in the group means 140 castings.

 

It takes an hour to cast and costs 48 END. Let's assume I'll have 40 END. I'll take 4d6 STUN as well. That takes an hour per casting (and some recoveries). Let's conservatively restrict it to 10 castings a day. The whole group is buffed in a week. Even if I have to restrict my castings to, say, 1 or 2 castings per day because we're hurled into an adventure, I can buff key stats first and build us all up gradually.

 

Or maybe I just need to Summon a Buffer Angel who has the power at the same AP and way less limitations...

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

Has anyone taken LTE into account in these analyses? The casting time is so long that the average END per turn might be negligible, but still, if you're burning STUN every time, it would seem to be a possibility that LTE would prevent the caster from buffing everyone in a party to max.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

Has anyone taken LTE into account in these analyses? The casting time is so long that the average END per turn might be negligible' date=' but still, if you're burning STUN every time, it would seem to be a possibility that LTE would prevent the caster from buffing everyone in a party to max.[/quote']

 

Let's say REC starts at 8. Spending 48 END in one phase, the effective result of the above spell, is 6x REC in one turn. That will cost a few LTE, but not a huge amount. Of course, the first thing to raise, given this issue, is his REC. He'll add 8 rec, on average, on the first casting. Now the power costs only 3x REC. The second time adds another 7, so he now has 23 REC, and the 48 END is only double his REC.

 

And he'll sleep between his daily castings anyway, recovering LTE. Remember, it's not anticipated he'll be doing this in combat. Even if the pace needs to be slowed, the character will eventually buff all the desired stats.

 

If we want to avoid LTE, let's get less extreme and build:

 

4d6 Aid, Any One Characteristic (+1/4), Fade Monthly (+2) (130 AP), Concentrate: 0 DCV throughout (-1), Extra Time 5 minutes (-2 1/2), OAF (-1), Incant throughout (-1/2), 2 handed gestures throughout (-1), Gradual Effect (6 hours; -1 1/2) 15 RP.

 

Now it costs no END whatsoever and he can cast it 12 times per hour. In ten hours, that's 120 castings. It takes 28 per person, so a couple of days' down time (remembering everyone else likely has Real Weapons and Real Armor, so they need down time for maintenance) allows a party of 8 to be fully buffed to +24 STR, +8 DEX, +12 CON, +12 BOD, +24 INT, +12 EGO, +24 PRE, +48 COM, +12 PD, +12 ED, +12 REC, +2 SPD, +24 STUN and +48 END. If time is an issue, we cherry pick the stats that will do the most good.

 

So our Warrior now sits at, say, 43 STR, 23 DEX, 25 CON, 25 BOD, 32 INT, 20 EGO, 37 PRE, 56 COM, 20 PD, 20 ED, 20 REC, 5 SPD, 53 STUN and 74 END. And I think I'm being pretty conservative with the base stats.

[jaws]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

It will take less than 5 months to do it. Maybe you don't do it all at once.

you buff yourself take care of the first one shot. You are already buffed so it is easy tot take care of another one... so on and so forth

do one a week you have got all of you in a bout a month, maybe 1.5 months. OK now you have 5 months of overpowered muchkinyness your GM has to work around. Can be dealt with. Sure! but it changes the whole power level of your campaign.

 

However this whole conversation is mute. There is no such thing as razor straight guidelines or control factors. All powers and characters as a whole need to be revised by the Gm. And you don't just let stuff like this through. Simple enough. No need to discuss.

 

AP limit/RP limit: its just a guideline to minimize the number of powers you have to scrap and rebuild. Any power even remotely like this should be scraped. It is munchkin material, scrap it, unless it fits your game style.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

However this whole conversation is mute. There is no such thing as razor straight guidelines or control factors. All powers and characters as a whole need to be revised by the Gm. And you don't just let stuff like this through. Simple enough. No need to discuss.

 

[English Nazi Mode]"Mute" means "unable to speak". http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mute

 

"Moot" means "of no practical importance; irrelevant"

 

Moot arguments on the Web tend to be by text, so I suppose they're also mute. [/English Nazi Mode]

 

AP limit/RP limit: its just a guideline to minimize the number of powers you have to scrap and rebuild. Any power even remotely like this should be scraped. It is munchkin material' date=' scrap it, unless it fits your game style.[/quote']

 

Unquestionably, and I've said so above. However, my simplistic point is that changing from an AP to an RP limit does not change the need for judgment, just the manner in which such judgment will be exercised and the abilities it will need to be exercised on. To me, it's easier to say "This power which breaches the AP cap is allowed because it is not abusive." than ""This power which conforms with the RP cap is disallowed because it is abusive." I'd rather allow the GM leeway to permit exceptional abilities to breach the default rules than require him to be tight and disallow exceptional abilities that don't breach the default rules.

[jaws]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

[English Nazi Mode]"Mute" means "unable to speak". http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mute

 

"Moot" means "of no practical importance; irrelevant"

 

Moot arguments on the Web tend to be by text, so I suppose they're also mute. [/English Nazi Mode]

 

LOL I have been by a Nazi

The only thing I can say in my defense is that my weakness in English comes from living in the beautiful beaches of Cancun for the past 23 years

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

LOL I have been by a Nazi

The only thing I can say in my defense is that my weakness in English comes from living in the beautiful beaches of Cancun for the past 23 years

 

You could also cite the amazing frequency of this misuse of the words - it's not like you aren't in good company

[Mordax]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

I can understand your desire to allow casters more powerful effects under limited circumstances. Don't put much stock in the RC cap thing as a replacement for AP, though: seems to me that it's just as much eyeballing either way.

 

I'm handling this with a few different things, IMC:

1. The AP cap on special abilities is really more of a Normal Characteristics Maxima: it can be exceeded, it just costs. Nobody's bitten there, but it leaves the door open if anybody really needs it. (Just as well. My experience with overspecialized characters mirrors PhilFleischmann's: they usually die long before the well rounded guys, not after.)
    
   
2. Casters can buy magical items that amplify the effects of spells. After all, a strong warrior can do some normal damage with their fist, and boost it with Maneuvers or CSLs...or just break down and buy a weapon if they want the advantage of Ranged, or Killing or whatever. A mage is the same way: their spells can do a certain amount of harm 'unarmed,' or they can use a tool to extend their natural capabilities.
    
   
3. Ritual magic with a vastly inflated AP cap is available to explain certain wondrous things in the world...but it always requires a large number of participants, not just extra time or money. That way, there's always an RP limitation built into whether or not someone can do really earthshaking stuff: the best spells require a social consensus, and all the baggage that implies.
   

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

The guidelines in APG wrt Effect Caps have been successful for me. This allows some advantages and some limitations to play into the evaluation of the effectiveness of a power. Even so, the GM still has to judge the utility of a power.

 

Example: A 40 AP cap is fine for most attacks, but 40 AP of Entangle effectively will 1-shot most heroic targets.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

A little Necromancy, eh?

 

 

Anyway, in the meantime, I used some Real Cost caps for Here There Be Monsters; for the various magic and psionic systems.

[Ice9]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

I've found something like this to work a lot better than AP caps. The main problem with AP caps is this:

Instant Minion - Mind Control 10d6

Charm of the Silver Tongue - Mind Control 10d6, Set Effect: Emotions Only, Extra Time (5 minutes), Incantations (must speak to target about subject relevant to desired emotion)

 

These have the same active points, and so in a pure AP cap setup, they're equally easy to obtain. That's bogus, and it penalizes players who accept significant limitations on their powers.

On the other hand, not all limitations are equally important. Some may be worth a reduced cost, but don't really hinder the actual effect enough to be worth a greater magnitude:

Scrying - Clairsentience (Sight and Hearing), Extra Time (1 hour), Gestures, Incantations, OIF (mirror), Concentration

 

So I use something I call "Active Limitations". Basically, limitations that I agree are significantly limiting the overall effectiveness and utility of the power - not just ease of use - reduce the AP directly.

Which limitations count for a given power is pretty situational. A fireball that takes two phases to cast - yes. A scrying spell that takes that time? No. Usually Gestures wouldn't count, but on a Teleport spell it certainly does, because it means you can't escape being tied up or immobilized with it. Things like Set Effect on Mind Control or Unfriendly on Summon almost always count.

 

It does require some case by case judgement, but I find it's a good way to have some limits without homogenizing abilities.

[Alcamtar]

Re: Setting a real point limit, instead of AP limit

 

Interesting, I've been thinking about that same approach for purposes of VPP limits, but hadn't considered applying it to RP in general.

 

Really when you think about it, Real Points are Active Points -- adjusted for utility. The problem is that some limitations are the equivalent of a "dump stat" (for balance purposes). And as Ice9 points out, specifics will vary with the power and/or SFX.

 

Similar reasoning applies to advantages (and possibly adders). I think sometimes power advantages result in AP inflation that is not really a balance problem.

 

Maybe replacing AP with some sort of "rule of X"? For example compute a power two different ways, once to determine the RP cost, and once to determine the rule-of-X cost, where the rule-of-X uses only a defined subset of power modifiers.