6E Rules changes confirmed so far

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

That's Dear Leader to you, Mister!

 

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

All Hail!!!

 

He's dear. So dear. I like him even better than "cats" ( must be said with hypnotized facial expression)

[Tclynch]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I have to agree. I see no real "earth shaking" changes here. I'll most likely get the core books, but will I use them.....doubtful.

None of the thus-far-released changes seem like anything that would make me want to "upgrade" to 6E. Quite the contrary. Too much of this looks to me like change for the sake of change. But I'll wait until I've bought and read it before I make any final decision.

 

The only change I like is switching to meters rather than hexes - something I was always amazed wasn't obvious way back in 1982.

[casualplayer]

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

 

EGO Rolls are how you keep the ubiquitous Strong Overconfidence Psych Lim (Complication!) from making you take a poke a Dr. Destroyer while your teammates are on vacation, and getting reduced to atoms. It's fairly important to have a good one.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I know I keep beating this drum (belaboring the point on the internet? I know, I'm the only one. ) but Char rolls need a little more detail on what they do and can do aside from provide skill bases. I mean they're important enough you can actually by skill levels to increase them albeit cheaply (or could) but I've seen them so under utilized in the past.

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I know I keep beating this drum (belaboring the point on the internet? I know' date=' I'm the only one. ) but Char rolls need a little more detail on what they do and can do aside from provide skill bases. I mean they're important enough you can actually by skill levels to increase them albeit cheaply (or could) but I've seen them so under utilized in the past.[/quote']

 

Interesting. I use them all the time particularly in Heroic games.

 

Essentially if there is not a specific rule or Skill to govern a desired action, I'll usually use an appropriate Characteristic Roll.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Interesting. I use them all the time particularly in Heroic games.

 

Essentially if there is not a specific rule or Skill to govern a desired action, I'll usually use an appropriate Characteristic Roll.

 

 

I use the same system myself.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Interesting. I use them all the time particularly in Heroic games.

 

Essentially if there is not a specific rule or Skill to govern a desired action, I'll usually use an appropriate Characteristic Roll.

 

I haven't really seen them used that much aside from the official functions (Ego as breakout rolls, Com as complimentary, etc). I've improvised sometimes with them but it all feels vague and handwave driven and most people I've talked to about are nervous about making them "free skills" and not having many ideas (like what would a Body roll entail, for example).

 

I don't mean devote a chapter or anything to characteristic rolls but a little fleshing out would be cool, perhaps some more mechanics that used them (like alternate Bleeding rules and LTE/Exhaustion effects and difficulties for for resisting infection, disease, etc for Con).

 

I guess a way to put it is that most of the char rolls seem to be in a somewhat similar position to the characteristic that shall not named. They're there, you can use them but its easy to forget and, aside from limited guides, you're kind of on your own.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I guess a way to put it is that most of the char rolls seem to be in a somewhat similar position to the characteristic that shall not named. They're there, you can use them but its easy to forget and, aside from limited guides, you're kind of on your own.

 

Yeah,I agree pretty much you are pretty on your own for specifics but you do have the basic idea to start with. if something is a decent idea its worth fleshing out a little if there's not much work involved.

[The Main Man]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Here's a thought: while I'm pretty sure that Density Increase, Growth, and Shrinking will continue to exist, what if they were to be built with Unified Power?

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I haven't really seen them used that much aside from the official functions (Ego as breakout rolls' date=' Com as complimentary, etc). I've improvised sometimes with them but it all feels vague and handwave driven and most people I've talked to about are nervous about making them "free skills" and not having many ideas (like what would a Body roll entail, for example).[/quote']

 

 

Well, you have to be careful to not let them trample skills -- or allowing a character to use a skill roll in place of a ckill he doesn't have.

• Trying to hang on to a ledge by your fingertips? Make a STR Roll.
  
• Trying to walk across an icy surface? Make a DEX Roll.
  
• Are you still conscious after a night of heavy drinking? Make a CON Roll.
  
• Trying to remember that lullaby your father sang to you as a child because it is the key to accessing a treasure he hid years ago. Make an INT Roll.
  
• Trying to hold yourself back from mouthing off when you shouldn't. Make an EGO Roll.
  

BODY Rolls have no use that I can see -- and they aren't even mentioned in 5ER . PRE Rolls, as discussed in 5ER, have little use and I can't remember having to roll on.

 

I don't mean devote a chapter or anything to characteristic rolls but a little fleshing out would be cool, perhaps some more mechanics that used them (like alternate Bleeding rules and LTE/Exhaustion effects and difficulties for for resisting infection, disease, etc for Con).

 

I guess a way to put it is that most of the char rolls seem to be in a somewhat similar position to the characteristic that shall not named. They're there, you can use them but its easy to forget and, aside from limited guides, you're kind of on your own.

 

Perhaps. I think a lot of it is that some Hero GMs just don't seem to be comfortable with a 55 point procedure tell them what to do. Okay, that's a bit of an exasggeration, but there does seem to be some uncomfortableness with improvisatioon.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

RE: replacing Characteristic Rolls with Skill Rolls - I, and groups I play with, usually impose an automatic -1 to -3 penalty.

[casualplayer]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Here's a thought: while I'm pretty sure that Density Increase' date=' Growth, and Shrinking will continue to exist, what if they were to be built with [i']Unified Power[/i]?

 

Betcha they will be the textbook examples of Unified Power.

 

Have I mentioned how excited I am for SexEd?

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

RE: replacing Characteristic Rolls with Skill Rolls - I' date=' and groups I play with, usually impose an automatic -1 to -3 penalty.[/quote']

 

Do you, perhaps, mean the other way around (that is, replacing Skill Rolls with Char Rolls)?

 

If so, I think you need to be harsher than that. If a skill covers an action, I don't think you can allow a Chraracteristic Roll to do it at more than a 7- because someone with a Familiarity can do it on 8-.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

duh. Yes. Other way.

 

I need more coffee.

 

 

And we do light penalties sometimes because we like cinematic success. We don't always sweat the details. Especially for easy tasks. But you can never Look Cool when you don't have the skill, which we like to do.

And sometimes we go "Roll and pray" as a way of saying "you can try anything, good luck." Doubly so for difficult tasks.

[Sketchpad]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I've always used PRE rolls for fear in horror games. You come across a bunch of zombies nibbling on your Uncle Pete? Make a PRE Roll -4. You're in the deep wilderness and spot something out of the corner of your eye ... quick, give me a PRE roll -1.

 

I've also played with Fear Rolls [(PRE+EGO/2)/5+9] or Fear Points [PRE+EGO] that deplete like damage.

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

duh. Yes. Other way.

 

I need more coffee.

 

 

And we do light penalties sometimes because we like cinematic success. We don't always sweat the details. Especially for easy tasks. But you can never Look Cool when you don't have the skill, which we like to do.

And sometimes we go "Roll and pray" as a way of saying "you can try anything, good luck." Doubly so for difficult tasks.

 

Character A has Breakfall at 12-.

Character B has a Familiarity with Breakfall, giving him an 8-.

Character C does not have Breakfall at all but has a DEX Rol of 11-.

 

I do not see how you can allow Character C to make a DEX Roll of greater than 7- to replace Breakfall; otherwise, you are completely undermining buying Familiariaties.

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I've always used PRE rolls for fear in horror games. You come across a bunch of zombies nibbling on your Uncle Pete? Make a PRE Roll -4. You're in the deep wilderness and spot something out of the corner of your eye ... quick, give me a PRE roll -1.

 

I've also played with Fear Rolls [(PRE+EGO/2)/5+9] or Fear Points [PRE+EGO] that deplete like damage.

 

Good point on the PRE Rolls.

[ajackson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I do not see how you can allow Character C to make a DEX Roll of greater than 7- to replace Breakfall; otherwise' date=' you are completely undermining buying Familiariaties.[/quote']

I would probably go with something like 'roll vs half your stat roll', so Joe Average would be rolling against a 6. It does make familiarities pointless if you have a 15+ stat roll, but eh.

[casualplayer]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I checked my inventory and I have some extra polate. Guess I'll share.

 

If STR is decoupled from Figured CHAR in SexEd, why wouldn't Telekinesis and maybe even Stretching just become Ranged STR? Flavored to taste, of course, so psychokinesis will be Invisible to all but Mental Senses, some degree of Indirect and Ranged while Stretching will have to Cross Intervening Space along with Ranged. Buying it as +STR to your base STR would mean an implied Unified Power structure, making it conceivable and advantageous to buy TK from 0 as a distinct pool of STR isolated from adjustment. Hmmm....

[Klaus Mogensen]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

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.

I also find a d3 StunX overkill. In particular, there will still be a one-third chance of x1, which is not only weak, but also superfluous, since you take at least as much STUN as BODY anyway. It might as well be x0.

 

I think d2+1 might be a better solution: x2 on a roll of 1-3, x3 on a roll of 4-6. Average 2.5, meaning 1d6K will do 8.75 average STUN, still far less than the 10.5 for 3d6N. One of my GMs used a d4, that also worked well (but ruined the d6 purity).

 

On the hit location chart, I imagine head shots will be reworked to x4 rather than x5. Or maybe the Killing column will be removed and the "N STUN" column made universal.

 

- Klaus

[Klaus Mogensen]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

IIf STR is decoupled from Figured CHAR in SexEd' date=' why wouldn't Telekinesis and maybe even Stretching just become Ranged STR? Flavored to taste, of course, so psychokinesis will be Invisible to all but Mental Senses, some degree of Indirect and Ranged while Stretching will have to Cross Intervening Space along with Ranged. Buying it as +STR to your base STR would mean an implied Unified Power structure, making it conceivable and advantageous to buy TK from 0 as a distinct pool of STR isolated from adjustment. Hmmm....[/quote']

If Telekinesis is just Ranged STR, you can add your Telekinesis to your normal STR. And your Telekinesis will be drained by "Drain Strength", even though your SFX is mental.

 

At any rate, I would like to see Telekinesis start at a much lower STR, say STR 30. This will fit better with the low-powered TK you see in fantasy and pulp fiction.

 

- Klaus

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

If Telekinesis is just Ranged STR, you can add your Telekinesis to your normal STR. And your Telekinesis will be drained by "Drain Strength", even though your SFX is mental.

 

At any rate, I would like to see Telekinesis start at a much lower STR, say STR 30. This will fit better with the low-powered TK you see in fantasy and pulp fiction.

 

- Klaus

 

I assume you actually mean STR -30.

[mabalmer]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Well, for better or for worse, here's my summation:

 

 

• The basic 3d6-roll-for-success mechanic remains, and it will continue to be "roll-low."
  I could see this one both ways, but I also know that HERO gamers are hidebound people as it is. So leaving this is probably for the best.
   
  
  
• No changes to the Speed Chart.
  Good. Getting my players to understand the concept of SPD, Phases, and the order of actions in a Turn (something I refer to as the Combat Clock) is difficult as it is.
   
  
  
• Movement will continue to be measured per Phase.
  This is also good, because if it was measured per Segment then things get weird.
   
  
  
• All measurements will be given in meters. There will be no use of "hexes" or any other mapping arrangement in 6E.
  THANK YOU. Hexes vs. meters is another one of those disconnects my players run into a lot.
   
  
  
• 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.
  Pointless, but I understand why it's being done. I can frequently find ways to use COM as a modifier for PRE-linked skills, and frequently, I allow COM to be used as a Complimentary roll for many PRE-based skills if they're being used in the right way. But I see Steve's argument, and he's the one writing it.
   
  
  
• 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.
  This is going to be a nightmare. I don't even want to think about this until Simon updates Hero Designer to adjust to 6E. I think the change is good in concept, but the problem is going to be its implementation. This is going to require a LOT more thinking on the part of the builder to make this work.
   
  
  
• 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.
  Good change. This allows me to have a high-DEX character who still can't hit the broad side of a barn but can dodge like a beast.
   
  
  
• Suggested starting point totals will be raised to compensate for the change to Characteristics -- no specifics yet.
  Expected, given the other changes. I echo some of the other issues that more points = more chances to get screwed by min/maxers, but meh.
   
  
  
• Perception will still be based on INT.
  :thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown NO. NO NO NO NO NO! Some of the smartest people I know are about as perceptive as a box of rocks!
   
  
  
• Leaping will no longer be derived from Strength -- it will start at a base amount for all characters, as with Running and Swimming.
  Good. I'm in favor of unlinking this one, because it conceptually makes sense to.
   
  
  
• 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.
  Uh. Okay? What else would you calculate it from? Or would you just have everyone start at an 8- and buy it up from there, regardless of what your stats are? I'm glad this is being left alone, because if skill values get unlinked from stats, HERO begins to tread eerily along the footsteps of Shadowrun, where Attributes mean exactly squat for you.
   
  
  
• Seduction Skill will be renamed Charm.
  Cheeky. I suppose this is more accurate, if in name only.
   
  
  
• No new Skills will be added, although a couple have been "tweaked" (no more details yet).
  Holding my judgement here...
   
  
  
• Package Deal will be renamed Template
  Pretty indifferent here.
   
  
  
• 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.
  THANK ALL THAT IS HOLY. FW was one of the most broken mechanics in the game. Anything that allows you, with repeated uses, to bring down a character's defenses to miniscule numbers so you can one-shot them is positively absurd.
   
  
  
• Adjustment Powers have been significantly reworked -- no further details yet.
  Once again...holding judgement.
   
  
  
• Energy Blast and Killing Attack will still be separate forms of Damage, as they are in 5E.
  One would hope.
   
  
  
• 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.
  Yay. No more STUN Lotto. My guess is that this won't change things with Hit Locations, though (i.e., a head shot is still a x5).
   
  
  
• 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.
  Also good. While it lowers the scariness of a KA, KAs were scary not because of the BODY they did, it was because of the obscene amount of STUN they were capable of doing. KAs were scary for the wrong reason, and now they can be scary for the right reason.
   
  
  
• Nothing has changed about the way STR adds to Hand-To-Hand Killling Attack damage.
  No opinion.
   
  
  
• Increased reach for larger-than-normal beings and weapons will not necessarily require Stretching -- no further details yet.
  YAY! No more of this silly "I stand 50 meters tall and only have the armspan of a six-foot-tall human" nonsense.
   
  
  
• The method of Adding Damage is supposed to be simplified -- no further details yet.
  Eh? I presume this has to do with increases to Damage Classes?
   
  
  
• 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.
  Not really sure how I feel about this. We'll see what happens.
   
  
  
• Damage Shield is going to be "different" -- no details yet.
  Once again...we'll see. DS is one of those mechanics I don't use very often.
   
  
  
• 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.
  Good. Making this simpler would be much nicer and allow for people to pay for the Active Points they need instead of buying more features than they need and buying Limitations later.
   
  
  
• Disadvantages are being renamed Complications, and Psychological Limitations will become Psychological Complications.
  Why? The terms were perfectly understandable before. Making name changes in other areas would be good, but not this.
  

Meh. I'm ambivalent to it. I'll wait to see what more happens.

[Beast]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

going to be hard to do with Steve getting rid of negative numbers

 

 

 

 

I assume you actually mean STR -30.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Perception will still be based on INT.

:thumbdown:thumbdown NO. NO NO NO NO NO! Some of the smartest people I know are about as perceptive as a box of rocks!

 

Assuming we get a reduced price for INT skill levels, I have no problem with INT governing INT skills and PER. But characters should not have to pay the same points for a skill level that only affects INT skills as they would pay to add enough INT to bump the skill rolls AND get other benefits.

 

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

THANK ALL THAT IS HOLY. FW was one of the most broken mechanics in the game. Anything that allows you, with repeated uses, to bring down a character's defenses to miniscule numbers so you can one-shot them is positively absurd.

 

An NND allows you to eliminate a character's defenses. The biggest issue I have with FW, which means I'm OK with its removal, is that it cost the same whether the attack was 2d6 or 20d6.

 

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

YAY! No more of this silly "I stand 50 meters tall and only have the armspan of a six-foot-tall human" nonsense.

 

Here, I like the concept but want to see the implementation. I see two possibilities. First, Growth gives you more, so you pay more for it. That seems reasonable. Second, Growth gets this added as a freebie and becomes a bargain priced bundle of abilities. Growth seems to change significantly every few editions, as no one ever seems happy with the overall result.

 

I'd be OK with "it gives more, and it costs more", accompanied with a straightforward way to back out some abilities for a reduced cost, and hopefully a statement that "Active Points are not a good benchmark for some powers, and Growth is one of these because it's really a combination of other powers".

 

Of course, just saying "buy the stuff large size should provide (we know what Steve suggests from the Size Templates) with limitations to reflect the need to pay END to use it and the drawbacks that come with it (yours or Steve's from the Size Template), and put them in this hear new fangled Unified Power, or link them" seems like a reasonable option as well.

 

EDIT: MORE OPTIONS?

 

Actually, since 5e came out, I've considered whether Growth and Shrinking could go in favour of Multiform (normal size and various modified sizes).

 

Thinking on it, has Steve confirmed whether he's proceeding with a Size characteristic? If Reach is built directly into Size, that would do the trick. Maybe this is all moot and Growth is just Size that Costs END. I don't see how that would deal with weapons, though.

 

We should be able to have a different version of size changing powers every edition through 12th at least, at this rate.

 

Disadvantages are being renamed Complications' date=' and [i']Psychological Limitations[/i] will become Psychological Complications.

Why? The terms were perfectly understandable before. Making name changes in other areas would be good, but not this.

 

I see two good reasons. First, logically, a mechanic called "disadvantages" would be the reciprocal of "advantages". That mechanic is called "limitations". Second, maybe this can bring perception further from "this is something the GM should use to punish your character" and closer to "this is something that should complicate the storyline and the challenges your character faces, enriching the game and adding to the fun".

 

Well, I'll definitely buy 6e. Then I need to assess whether it's easier to house rule any changes I want in 6e, or house rule the 6e parts I want back into 5e.

 

Given we've seen very little, and what we've seen is random (those items Steve was asked AND felt comfortable answering at this time in a chat forum), it's far too early to make any real judgements. I expect there's a lot Steve hasn't told us, in addition to the things we still have questions on from what he has said. The books are going to be big - maybe even bigger that this thread.