6E Rules changes confirmed so far

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Instant Change is probably done with Transform to conform to existing mechanics. Sure' date=' it could have been done with Images, Shape Change, or others, but with Transform, your clothes are in fact [i']actually changed.[/i] I didn't like it at first, but it actually makes more sense than having a Power that only does a single thing. On the other hand, Transform has been pulling a very heavy load for quite some time (ever since 4th Ed). We'll see what's been done in 6E, maybe that's a reason for a couple new Powers.

 

I've heard that all of the Powers are being replaced with Transform and Extradimensional Movement.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I'm not so sure that Steve is going to reveal anything more -- especially after this thread.

 

Because people didn't like some of the information released?

[McCoy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I don't think Steve has any plans to even present a Frankenrules version of Find Weakness' date=' but I could be wrong.[/quote']

He may not, I already did.

Find Weakness without using the Find Weakness Power: Drain PD 1d6' date=' any [special effect'] power one at a time (Drains physical Defense from force wall, force field, armor, and chacteristic PD, in that order. Remember that Drain removed 2/3 of the die roll vs Armor and Force Wall.; +1/4), Ranged (+1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Invisible Power Effects, Hide effects of Power (Fully Invisible; +2) (42 Active Points); Limited Power Power loses about half of its effectiveness (only up to half of target's total current physical defense; -1), Limited Power Power loses about half of its effectiveness (only vs specific attack; -1), Requires A PER Roll (-1), Limited Power Power loses about a fourth of its effectiveness (each attempt after the first against same target is made at a cumulative -2 penalty; -1/4), Limited Power Power loses about a fourth of its effectiveness (Burnout, a missed PER roll precludes any more attempts against the same target; -1/4)

 

42 Active points, 9 Real points per die.

 

Makes as much sense as buying Instant Change as a Transform.

I'm not sure that I've built a character for 5e that has had any need for Instant Change. For many of them' date=' it's simply a matter of the costume appearing as part of the SFX of activating a Power. For the others, they simple take the one phase to change clothes. So I can't say that I really missed Instant Change at all.[/quote']

Yet that was the first power of my BBB character Millennium. He always looked heroic. Had Instant Change bought with the +0 "always on" advantage. At the top of every phase, his costume was cleaned, mended, and his hair styled. No matter how badly he was getting his butt kicked, he always looked marvelous!

On the other hand' date=' I'm not crazy about the Regeneration build. But there was more about 5e that I liked than I didn't so it was really just a very minor annoyance the few times I used Regeneration.[/quote']

OTOH there was more I didn't like about FRED than I did, but I had to go along with it to play the game. I never did buy 5RE in hardback, only in PDF. And every time I had to assemble that patchwork for Regeneration I got annoyed all over again.

 

If you check out my first post on this thread, #85, you will see that I said there were four changes that I liked (including making CV seperate characteristics), four that I said I didn't (three of which were about the continued existance of PD/rPD, ED/rED and multiplying one die roll aby another, which have annoyed me since 1982 and what I didn't like is that these were NOT changing), and TEN where I said I would wait and see! More "wait and see" than likes and dislikes put together.

 

I've also said that I will buy SexEd, making me one of the few posters to actually commit to that on this thread.

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Do we know that COM the talent is going to be a straight add and not continue to employ the same or similar (elegant) mechanic that it did as COM the stat? Not too hard to make it a talent purchased as a roll. Probably how I will toolkit it even if it's not in the new edition.

 

Why toolkit it? You can just add a Requires a Skill Roll limitation to the Talent if in't not based on a roll. But maybe that's what you meant. I also interpret "Toolkitting" to mean an actual change to how something is done -- such as calculating skill rolls differently.

[Beast]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Sean you could have just had all the end spending powers cost x1.5 or more end to represent that effect of not having a high End value and only sell back some recovery to get the concept you wanted

 

like you said in an other thread there is no right way to do it:eg:

 

 

I have a high threshold of pain, which I've built with high CON, which gives me high STUN and (for some reason) ED (- why?) but I don't want high REC or END because although I'm tough my lungs were chemically burnt in an industrial accident, so I want to sell back the REC and END. I can't? But it makes perfect sense for my concept!

 

Also we never really knew what CON was worth. Virtually all of its value was concentrated in the figured characteristics: you get 21 points of value for spending 20 points on CON. What is it worth 'alone' - avoiding being stunned is useful, but that is what it is mainly used for as CON rolls tend to be rare.

 

(And that sounds suspiciously like a quote from a supplement from about 2nd or 3rd ed...)

 

 

 

IME PD and ED are almost always tweaked, if only because I don't like characters to necessarily have unbreachable resistant defences, and it generally is not necessary - it is usually cheaper and just as effective to buy pd/ed+armour, but everyone will have their own experience of this.

 

 

 

Well, looking, for example, at the sample characters in 5ER, only one of the 12 has fewer than half their figured characteristics point modified (The Verdict only modifies 2), and 5 of them have more than half of their figured characteristics modified.

 

Now if the change means that you modify more of what are currently figured characteristics, that might take longer, but then you are not calculating the figureds. You still have to write down a number, even if you do not modify anything. Anyway, none of us are going to take more thana few seconds longer even the first time we build a 6thed character.

 

We'll probably see more variation in character design this way too - figured characteristics can make you lazy - how many times have any of us thought 'how much stun SHOULD this character have?' instead of just eyeballing the figured STUN and dumping any spare points there?

 

The more I think about it, the less of an issue it seems.

[jtelson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Why toolkit it? You can just add a Requires a Skill Roll limitation to the Talent if in't not based on a roll. But maybe that's what you meant. I also interpret "Toolkitting" to mean an actual change to how something is done -- such as calculating skill rolls differently.

 

RSR is all or nothing, Treating as Complimentary Skill is different.

[torchwolf]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I found that Com could be used as a complementry roll or used in place of Presence where the character was more based on looks rather than personality with those social skills

I also liked that a Com roll could give an 'Eye of the Beholder" effect where an NPC might chose someone else because there was something more appealing to them (the one with the highest Com may not always be the winner)

instead of the "I'll have the pretty one"

 

That's exactly how I used it for more than 10 years... the "first impression" effect, and the old Star Trek "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations"... "eh, well, someone oughta like Grace Jones, too".

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

. On the other hand' date=' Transform has been pulling a [b']very[/b] heavy load for quite some time (ever since 4th Ed). We'll see what's been done in 6E, maybe that's a reason for a couple new Powers.

.

 

Along with EDM

 

I'm hoping the new powers will be cleaner methods for things like Possession.

[McCoy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I'm thinking more of some occasional Hero fan coming in and reading the last few pages of the thread and the impression that will leave him with. I know that if I didn't have previous knowledge of the concept of decoupling figureds and I saw a statement saying that figured characteristics were going away or being removed' date=' then the conclusion I would jump to would be that they are facing the same fate as COM.[/quote']

Now we're being called to task on how our post MIGHT be misinterpeted out of context?

 

*Takes a few deep breaths*

 

Forget this thread

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I agree entirely - your build might look slightly different in terms of point distribution but the end effect will be that you can have a character who works identically to one that you play now.

 

Nothing about the in-game experience will be changed by this.

 

But to some us in game play experience is not the point of the Hero system. The Character generation system is.

 

I don't feel that Hero plays all that much better or worse than any other reasonably competent game on the market right now.

 

The reason I love the system, above and beyond all other game systems out there, is the character generation system.

 

The one that is getting radically overhauled, with removal of characteristics, definitions and interrelationship changing of characteristics, the removal of ECs.....

 

I always read a game system chargen first. I compare it to Hero. If it doesn't really do what I want I skip the game.

 

If I were to read a 6E that is just 5E as it is now, and just the changes listed in the first post I would think (not unlike I thought when I first read GURPS Chargen) - hmmm looks like someone is ripping off the Hero system and doing it badly - it's leaving out things I like. I'll stick with what I have.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Why toolkit it? You can just add a Requires a Skill Roll limitation to the Talent if in't not based on a roll. But maybe that's what you meant. I also interpret "Toolkitting" to mean an actual change to how something is done -- such as calculating skill rolls differently.

 

Requires a skill roll is either all or nothing, a complimentary skill does not function like that. Also, RSR is often (not always) brought to a level where active points effect the outcome so the more aesthetically pleasing you are, the less often it has impact. What would the Skill be for that matter? You also lose some other aspects of the Comeliness character that have been belabored at length in various threads.

[incrdbil]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I'm not so sure that Steve is going to reveal anything more -- especially after this thread.

 

With any new version of a product, there comes a point where the revalation of details might be counterproductive. Those willing to keep an open mind and try something usually stay just like that. Those simply uncomfortable with change will seize upon any new information to provide justification for that dislike of change, often in defiance of the actual content of the information or degree of chage it represents.

 

From the moment sixth edition went from a thought to something that was going to happen, the fact that some players would hate it was assured, simply by statistics, and human psychology.

 

Complete retention of the existing market is a hopeless goal for most products that evolve and revise themselves. It can even be counterproductive if you try to hard towards this goal. You measure the potential long term gains versus the realistic projected losses as a result of change, and hope your projection is right.

[ajackson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

For example' date=' if look at the Hit Location chart, you only get a STUN multiplier of 5 when you roll 3-5 on 3d6 which is a 10/216 chance.[/quote']

The main reason for not having an issue with hit location is that normal attacks get the same benefit -- sure, a 6 dc KA to the head average 35 stun, but a 6 DC EB to the head averages 42.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

And we don't know the hit location chart hasn't been changed to suit the rules. Unless that tidbit has been revealed.

 

I'll tell you one thing though. It's getting a bit... old to keep being told that you don't like the changes or even some of them that you're just frightened of change.

[Beast]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

the this is you +2 levels act 14- only in certain social interactions only gives 2 levels effect(look you made the roll by 4 or 5 so you get a +2 to your seduction roll)

to get that level of success you would need a Com of 30 for a 15- and that is if you roll average(11-)to get a +2 90% of the time(14-) you would need a Com stat of at least 45

 

you could have multiple levels of activate but I see that and yours as a poor kludged subtitute for an already perfectly working feature that is being dropped because some people whined that they did not use it so it was not needed

 

by having the Stat roll for Com you can have a wide range of results

any where from epic failure of your makeup to the perfect make over

 

 

 

I agree about INT: it is only used for INT rolls, so it makes sense.

 

As to the eye of the beholder effect from COM, complimentary rolls never make things worse, so it isn't a true measure anyway, but you'll still be able to do that:

 

+2 levels with interaction skills (only where appearance is a factor) (14- activation)

 

In fact this allows more fine tuning of how idiosyncratic your good looks are - most people do not find you that attractive but some find you stunning (Grace Jones, perhaps?), change the activation to 8-.

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

If you check out my first post on this thread, #85, you will see that I said there were four changes that I liked (including making CV seperate characteristics), four that I said I didn't (three of which were about the continued existance of PD/rPD, ED/rED and multiplying one die roll aby another, which have annoyed me since 1982 and what I didn't like is that these were NOT changing), and TEN where I said I would wait and see! More "wait and see" than likes and dislikes put together.

 

I've also said that I will buy SexEd, making me one of the few posters to actually commit to that on this thread.

 

I was more or less sharing my own thoughts on the items you missed from fourth -- I wasn't making any judgments.

 

I understand your feeling about things you'd lhave like to have seen. I know I would have been disappointed if Figured Characteristics hadn't been decoupled.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I'll tell you one thing though. It's getting a bit... old to keep being told that you don't like the changes or even some of them that you're just frightened of change.

 

Yeah. It's pretty insulting.

 

When I first found Hero one of the things that attracted me was the interconnectedness of figured stats, I loved how things hung together. It was one of the reasons I got into the system.

 

Being told that I fear change when one of the reasons I got into the system is being removed is irritating.

 

I embraced the changed in 4e wholeheartedly, and enjoyed much of the changes in 5th (some I houseruled away - Regen, IC, ECs, and Damage Shields I pretty much run 4th (or even 3rd) ed versions of). I don't fear change. I just don't like most of the changes that have been announced.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

After carefully reading the 6E Forums. This thread. Several other threads.

 

I have come to a conclusion.

 

 

We're all crazy. Bat-S--- Insane. The lot of us. Totally bonkers.

 

It's a game. I got me some dice. Pick a version. Let's rock.

[ajackson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

One thing is clear - this is something that people DO care about. 43 pages in 2 days. That has to be some sort of record.

It's clear that at least some people care passionately. It's not so clear that any large number of people care; the number of people actually posting in this thread is not large.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Edit: Dear sweet Gods of Gaming. I'm about to get into it again

 

Comeliness response: The threads are still there in the 6th ed forums. Either you like the characteristic or you don't, same for the Talent It's subjective neither is objectively "better". Those of you who hated, congrats. You won.

[Kenn]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Hopefully, SexEd will get rid of the characteristics having a non-zero start value. I mean that whole "start at 10" implies that I'm playing an adult who is a little better than the average person in the street. Why not just start all the characteristics at zero, and have everyone's starting points jump by an extra 125-175 points? I mean, yeah, it'll be some extra work for the 90% of the characters that fit that paradigm, but the other 10% won't have to screw around with those complicated negative numbers in their costs.

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Now we're being called to task on how our post MIGHT be misinterpeted out of context?

 

*Takes a few deep breaths*

 

Forget this thread

 

I apologize. It's the technical writer in me who prefers accurate language.

[ajackson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Because people didn't like some of the information released?

I might point out that there's almost zero surprises in what Steve has released, and people mostly haven't complained about the stuff that's a surprise (some minor complaints about KAs) -- they've complained about figured characteristics, which has been posted since forever in the 6e discussion and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who was following those discussions.

[Kenn]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Who said we were surprised?

 

Disappointed? Yeah.

Questioning Mr. Long's Wisdom? Guilty.

Surprised? No.

 

There's just nothing like the feeling of fresh salt.

[Beast]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

it will have to look like an over worked kludged monster compared to the beautiful mechanic of comp rolls already in the game

 

I'm not saying it cannot be done in 6e

I'm saying you will need to use this ugly bastard stepchild of multiple activates to simulate a feature that is now gone (for the Com stat only)

and take up way too much space on the character sheet

 

Other than a cost of the stat,the stat,the stat roll and a mechanic that is used for other stat and skill rolls

 

 

 

 

Do we know that COM the talent is going to be a straight add and not continue to employ the same or similar (elegant) mechanic that it did as COM the stat? Not too hard to make it a talent purchased as a roll. Probably how I will toolkit it even if it's not in the new edition.