6E Rules changes confirmed so far

[Jomster]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

How did I manage to miss this thread? It's been running for just over 5 days and is pitching in at an unbelievable 240 posts per day!

[lemming]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

My goodness.

 

I admit to naivete. When I first posted the Sixth Edition rules tidbits that Steve Long had revealed, I really didn't imagine they would prompt such a torrent of verbiage. I'm still not sure whether to be proud or ashamed of the result.

 

It's not like you posted a thread about Takofanes fighting Dr. Destroyer...

[megaplayboy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

And this is a problem because...? Frankly' date=' in-genre, plenty of non-mentalists have loads of willpower, so ego should be priced to be useful if you [i']don't have mental powers. At that point, giving it a benefit for mental powers makes it too good for mentalists.

 

Well, the baseline question should be, should mental powers be as effective as other powers? The second question, IMO, should be, have they been as effective in practice as other powers? (the verdict from most of the games I've played in has generally been "no") If they're not as effective, what is the reason they are less effective? I submit the reason they haven't been is due to the current breakout roll rules, which requires the target to simply make a successful ego roll to break free of a mental illusion, telepathic probe, mind control attempt, or mind scan attempt. Generally the first breakout roll attempt is either instantaneous or occurs after the first phase.

Any advantage to EGO vs. EGO is not going to be that dramatic, since most mentalists will have an ego roll between 13- and 15-, and most superheroic level characters will have an ego roll between 11- and 13-. And the caveat to my suggestion is that, absent active effort by the mentalist to maintain the power(i.e., spending end, or not attacking others with mental powers), the breakout reverts to a straight ego roll.

Otherwise you either wind up with the mentalist always having to try for a lesser effect(which, in combat, may not do much compared to a straight-up ego blast anyway) in order to avoid getting the power broken immediately, or having to haymaker it, or trying it at the highest level with the expectation that 3 out of 5 times the subject will break free immediately or almost immediately. It's a fairly glaring play balance flaw that's ignored by most folks because they hate the idea that mental powers might actually be effective on their own PCs, in my personal experience.

[ajackson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Well' date=' the baseline question should be, should mental powers be as effective as other powers?[/quote']

Sure. That means, however, that they should be able to put down an agent with one attack, and a hero will probably break out after one round. I think that mental powers should have a higher base effectiveness, and that most heroes should have 20+ ego

[Beast]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

with ECV not going to be a part of ego

point spent on ego will now pull double duty in defense vs mental powers and Presence attacks

And if you do not mind your character not looking that impressive you could add those points from Pre to Ego to help even more

 

I can see a whole lotta changes in how things interact with each other

a high Con but then not needing any more End so I can see a lot more 1/2 or 0 end powers and End reserves

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Will buying Ego as defense against mental attacks be worth it without Ego contributing to ECV, I wonder? Mental Defense is half the price, and if all you get is Ego and Pre defense (and most supers buy some PRE anyway), then MD is a real bargain. That is, unless Ego is dropped from two pts.

[Beast]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

it was mentioned that characteristic prices would change(I can only see them going down)

while MD just takes points off the top(it is the only def vs mental attack so it does have it's uses and is not useless)

straight ego makes it harder to get more control or better deception or deeper reading or just finding the target

So if Ego goes to 1 pt on the top end of effects it can be x4 as effective

it will also increase ego roll for break out

so if your character does not need to look impressive

Points that would have go to Pre for defense can be spent on Ego and add a way lot more to making your character more mental proof

 

on the other hand having adjustment powers not go below 0, makes a drain vs ego then going for the mind control to get total control you would still need to have 9d6 or cumulative to a level above 30

 

 

even then if you get a +30 they have a 9- roll to get out so if toy want a long term hold your going to need to be around 40 for a 7-,50 for a 5-

60 for a -3

and remember that that is their first breakout roll they get a +1 at phase,+2 at turn.....

 

in my view this means that mentalists to control or deceive a foe will have to be built on more points than other characters and it was hard to get them to be effective already

 

 

 

Will buying Ego as defense against mental attacks be worth it without Ego contributing to ECV' date=' I wonder? Mental Defense is half the price, and if all you get is Ego and Pre defense (and most supers buy some PRE anyway), then MD is a real bargain. That is, unless Ego is dropped from two pts.[/quote']

[ajackson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Will buying Ego as defense against mental attacks be worth it without Ego contributing to ECV' date=' I wonder?[/quote']

I'm assuming it will be dropped to 1. Actually, I'm assuming all the primaries will drop to 1; without figs they're generally worth x1, and eliminating cost multipliers for stats is certainly a simplification.

[CorpCommander]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I didn't read the whole thread but I got the jist reading a dozen plus pages. Steve is Hero to some and a witch in need of lit tinder to others. I missed where he suggested all primary characteristics be based upon a 3d6 roll but given some of the hatin' it seems he must have suggested that at one point!

 

Well I am excited for 6th edition. I think the changes are needed and while they will pose some new issues in the end I think we'll find they give us granularity that we've been missing and reasons for trying new things.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

How did I manage to miss this thread? It's been running for just over 5 days and is pitching in at an unbelievable 240 posts per day!

 

It's actually settled down over the past day or so...

[Tasha]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I didn't read the whole thread but I got the jist reading a dozen plus pages. Steve is Hero to some and a witch in need of lit tinder to others. I missed where he suggested all primary characteristics be based upon a 3d6 roll but given some of the hatin' it seems he must have suggested that at one point!

 

Well I am excited for 6th edition. I think the changes are needed and while they will pose some new issues in the end I think we'll find they give us granularity that we've been missing and reasons for trying new things.

 

Nah we are just opinionated geeks. This is just a an outlet for us to discuss/argue about our personal pet peeves with the scant info that Steve has given us. Honestly, it's probably a good thing that he didn't really give us much in the way of real details or this thread would have been hotter.

 

Part of me wonders if he mentioned those because he knew that those changes would be contentious and wanted to see our reactions.

 

Oh well, all in a good cause

Tasha

 

We love ya' Steve!!!

[Vondy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

For that matter I didn't like mamy of the changes to 5th ed, if I had a PDF of the Big Blue Book would probably use that for FtF gaming. But I adapted.

 

I still miss instant change!

 

House rule it back in.

[Vondy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

When I first posted the Sixth Edition rules tidbits that Steve Long had revealed' date=' I really didn't imagine they would prompt such a torrent of verbiage. [/quote']

 

Really?! Verbiage is the bedrock of Internet discussion boards.

[Vondy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I'll tell you one thing. I've decided to never be anything but positive with any "outsiders" including those who use other systems no matter how I ultimately feel when all the dust clears. DOJ and its wonderful leader and staff really deserve to do well and i hope things take off for them.

 

That's Dear Leader to you, Mister!

 

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

[Klaus Mogensen]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I think most of the changes make sense, though I am a bit disappointed about some of the non-changes. I would have liked to see more streamlining.

 

Now that EGO no longer adds to ECV, it seems a relatively useless characteristic. It protects vs. PRE attacks, but so does PRE itself (unless that is changed), and it protects against certain mental effects (useful, but only in campaigns where mental attacks are relatively common).

 

Will EGO be repriced to ½? Doubtful. A better idea may be to let some skills - e.g. "Concentration Skills" - be derived from EGO. Many of the 4e "General Skills" could apply: Demolitions, Forgery, Gambling, Shadowing, Survival. Perhaps also Lip Reading, Mimicry and Ventriloquist, since these in the source material often are seen with mentalists/hypnotists. The Resistance Talent could also be reworked as a Concentration Skill.

 

- Klaus

[Klaus Mogensen]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Actually' date=' I'm assuming all the primaries will drop to 1; without figs they're generally worth x1, and eliminating cost multipliers for stats is certainly a simplification.[/quote']

Yes, that would make sense. With CV and SPD decoupled from DEX, there isn't much need to split it up, even at a cost of 1. As mentioned above, EGO may need a bit more goods to be worth 1 point. INT may be the biggest problem, since it covers both INT Skills and Perception, but if skill costs are dropped a bit (to 3 points for "all (CHA) Skills"), that may cease to be a problem.

 

- Klaus

[McCoy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

House rule it back in.

An option when I GM, less available when I'm the player.

[jtelson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

An option when I GM' date=' less available when I'm the player.[/quote']

 

Really? As a GM if a player came to me and asked that something as minor as Instant Change (or Regen or some other single power with which there might be a mechanics issue) be done differently, absent a compelling reason not to, I would have no issue house ruling it back in.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

*Pant pant* Finally caught up! *Huff*

[McCoy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Really? As a GM if a player came to me and asked that something as minor as Instant Change (or Regen or some other single power with which there might be a mechanics issue) be done differently' date=' absent a compelling reason not to, I would have no issue house ruling it back in.[/quote']

Some have, some have insisted on the Frakenrules patch, others have just said no. All perfectly within their rights.

[Peregrine]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Really? As a GM if a player came to me and asked that something as minor as Instant Change (or Regen or some other single power with which there might be a mechanics issue) be done differently' date=' absent a compelling reason not to, I would have no issue house ruling it back in.[/quote']

 

That's a mark in your favor as a GM. Not all GMs are so cooperative.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I'm not sure that there's any distinction (real or imagined) in 6E between Primary and Secondaries if they're all starting with a base number even if those base numbers are different. Seems to me the system just increased to 17 Characteristics - more if any of the old Characteristics (such as DEX) have been split.

Yeah' date=' and they had the nerve to say Comeliness was cluttering up the character sheet. If that wasn't so damned funny, I'd cry.[/quote']

Don't forget Running' date=' Leaping and Swimming, and possibly a size stat, which would raise the number of stats on the left hand side of the sheet to 20 or 21.[/quote']

 

Maybe I’m missing something, but some people are commenting on how and/or implying that de-figuring “Secondary” Characteristics is adding a whole bunch of stuff to the character sheet. How do you figure? All these “new” Characteristics that used to be Secondary/Figured Characteristics are not just suddenly being crammed onto the character sheet out of nowhere; they were all already there, weren’t they? Just because PD/ED/STUN/REC are no longer figured they don’t magically start taking up more room, do they? The “standard” character sheet already has OCV and DCV, although a little extra room may be taken up for its cost now. And Running, Leaping, and Swimming are all on the example sheet in my book also, unless I’m thinking of the wrong character sheet. So what is all this stuff that is being added that will “clutter” the new character sheets?

 

Note, I’m not trying to pick on you three, you are just the most recent to comment on this issue and it has me very confused….

 

EDIT: I just checked and the movement powers listed by both by myself and megaplayboy in fact are not listed with the characteristics in the example character sheet. This implies, to me at least, that having them listed with characteristics is an issue with what format of character sheet you are using and not an issue of what is being “crammed” onto the “left side of the page” in the current edition or 6E. The only thing new compared to the “standard” or original 5ER character sheet in the book is having ECV as a characteristic and not an optional value that may or may not be displayed. Again, I’m just curious since some people seem to think that format is part of what makes de-figuring characteristics so “complicated”.

[Vondy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Now that EGO no longer adds to ECV' date=' it seems a relatively useless characteristic.[/quote']

 

Unless Steve is also removing the Ego, Ego+10, Ego+20, Ego+30 method for adjudicating mental power effects, Ego would still be used to determined whether or not you were able to resist mental powers. Additionally, Ego rolls are used for pushing, overcoming some optional value effects, overcoming pschological limitations, optionally as an alternative to presence for resisting some interaction effects, and in other cases where the game-master feels an ego roll is apropos. Decoupling ECV from Ego does not render the characteristic useless.

[Vondy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

An option when I GM' date=' less available when I'm the player.[/quote']

 

 

Fair enough. I tend to post in "GM-Think" mode. Personally, I prefer shorthand methods. When players ask for them I'm inclined to approve them unless there is a balance issue in play. Not all GMs are as forgiving, I admit.

[Vondy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

The basic 3d6-roll-for-success mechanic remains, and it will continue to be "roll-low."

 

I'm neither here nor there in terms of probabilities on this one. It does have the advantage

No changes to the Speed Chart.

 

Good.

 

Movement will continue to be measured per Phase.

Good.

 

All measurements will be given in meters. There will be no use of "hexes" or any other mapping arrangement in 6E.

 

Excellent! This simplifies a great many calculations and allows people to scale hexes as desired.

 

Comeliness will no longer be one of the Characteristics. It's being replaced with a Talent, Striking Appearance, which a given group can choose to use in their game if they want a character's appearance to have a mechanical effect.

 

I don't mind it as a characteristic. I don't mind it as a talent. Either way.

All the other Characteristics will remain, but none of them will be "Figured," i.e. derived from other Characteristics. They'll all start with a base value that must be bought up separately. The costs of some of them have been "tweaked" -- no further details yet.

 

I understand the reasoning and within that context its consistent. In terms of method it doesn't bother me. I'd like to see what the primary characteristics base costs are going to be in 6E, however.

OCV, DCV, OECV, and DECV will become separate Characteristics, not derived from DEX and EGO. They'll start with a base value of 3 and will be bought up separately.

 

I can see some benefits of doing it this way, and its consistent with the increased granularity, decouple everything mindset. It will help some heroic games with a lot of "highly trained" characters avoid DEX creep.

 

Suggested starting point totals will be raised to compensate for the change to Characteristics -- no specifics yet.

 

I'm not sure that increasing point totals commensurate with this won't cause some problems for certain genres or styles of play, but I have no specific argument to advance in that department - we'll see.

 

Perception will still be based on INT.

 

I'd have liked to have seen this decoupled as well, both for consistently and modeling granularity reasons, but I can live with it.

 

Leaping will no longer be derived from Strength -- it will start at a base amount for all characters, as with Running and Swimming.

 

This is consistent with the decoupling mindset.

Skills will still be calculated from CHAR/5, but there will be an optional "Toolkitting" note about changing that if desired. Other Toolkitting notes will appear throughout the rules -- no further details on those.

 

Toolkitting notes are king, baby. As for the formula, its as good a base formula as any. TUS provided good options for those of us who want to tweak it for our games.

 

Seduction Skill will be renamed Charm.

 

Purely cosmetic. I'm not sure it represents the skill better, however. One can be seduced by any benefit, be it social, monetary, sexual, et al. Charm doesn't necessarily represent being seduced. Its an entirely different skill.

 

No new Skills will be added, although a couple have been "tweaked" (no more details yet).

 

This is neither here nor there for me. I add new skills wherever I perceive a need and produce different master-lists for each campaign.

Package Deal will be renamed Template

 

Cosmetic. Logical. The deal part dissapeared in 5E.

Some new Powers have been added, and others have been removed. The only one mentioned is Find Weakness, which is being removed. There will be no official way to reduce Defenses below 1/2 as with Armor Piercing.

 

Without more information there is nothing to comment on. Personally, I will probably carry Find Weakness into the new system for expediencies sake. It makes sense to kick it out for superheroic genres where everything is bought for points, and to limit the reduction to 1/2 for balance purposes, but I run heroic games where people don't buy equipment and frequently change it. The cost of purchasing a naked AP advantage with RSR scaled to the biggest possible weapon a character will possibly ever carry (some regular arms run over 100AP) is both annoying and prohibitive in the down to earth genres I run.

 

Adjustment Powers have been significantly reworked -- no further details yet.

 

Impossible to comment without more details. The current system does rub me the wrong way though.

 

Energy Blast and Killing Attack will still be separate forms of Damage, as they are in 5E.

 

Presumably this means Normal and Killing damage will be seperate. I have yet to see a method I consider better proposed (though one may exist) than the way we currently do it.

 

The Stun Multiplier for Killing Attack will become a straight 1/2d6. It will still be possible to buy up the Stun Multiplier with Advantages.

 

I agree that the StunX is a problem in games that use generalized damage. At the same time, cutting the StunX down to 1-3 seems like overkill. On the other hand, I run heroic games with the hit location chart (or default to "chest" sans called shots in some games) and don't have this problem. So long as the hit location chart multipliers remain unchanged I don't really care. If they do get changed, I'll just carry the old chart over.

You will be able to apply your Normal Defenses to the STUN damage of a Killing Attack whether you have any Resistant Defenses or not.

 

Seems unecessary. Won't be a deal breaker.

 

Nothing has changed about the way STR adds to Hand-To-Hand Killling Attack damage.

 

Couldn't care less.

Increased reach for larger-than-normal beings and weapons will not necessarily require Stretching -- no further details yet.

 

Depending on the implementation this could be a very good thing.

 

The method of Adding Damage is supposed to be simplified -- no further details yet.

 

Again, depending on implementation this could be a very good thing.

 

The Multipower and VPP Frameworks will remain, but Elemental Control is being replaced by a new Limitation, Unified Power (no value given). Aside from GM oversight there will be no restrictions on what Unified Power can be applied to.

 

I stopped using EC in 5th Edition. I can't comment on Unified Power until I see it, but if it works the way I think it will - as a blanket limitation applied to all powers of a special effect that creates a "drain one drain them all" effect I like it already.

 

Damage Shield is going to be "different" -- no details yet.

I've been using 4th Ed. Damage Shield because it got bushwacked in 5E. Different is neither good nor bad. Must have more data.

 

There will be another, more granular way to make a Power ECV-targeted than using the BOECV Advantage. No specifics given, but it involves breaking the Advantage into its separate components (i.e. ECV Attack Roll, Line Of Sight, etc.) and "reassembling" them to make them more flexible (and simpler according to Steve). Steve implied that he's used this approach for other elements of the system.

 

Prima Facie it seems like a good thing. We'll have to see it in action.

 

Disadvantages are being renamed Complications, and Psychological Limitations will become Psychological Complications.

 

Is this a purely cosemtic difference, or are we also seeing a change in how Disadvantages/Complications/Limitations/Whatever work?

There will be a single index, printed in both 6E rulebooks, with a letter code before each number to indicate which book it refers to.

 

A unified index is probably a very good thing.