6E Rules changes confirmed so far

[archermoo]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

What he is saying is with figures you know exactly what the normal Stun for a character with STR 15 CON 13 and Body 13 for example' date=' should be automatically. Without, its pretty much up to the GM's whim ans personal sense of scale what the norm would be. What was an automatic process for normal becomes something the GM would need to establish. if indeed there is a norm and not just chaos.[/quote']

 

Interesting. I can't say that I've every played in a game (certainly not run one) where what the "normal" amount of Stun for someone with a STR 15, CON 13 and Body 13 was mattered in the least. Generally there was an indication as to what range all of the Characteristics should be at.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

The basic complaint is - as I see it - now they must consider those Characteristics in statting out a character.

 

Whereas before, they could just raise Primary, do a calculation and walk away. I can't say as I have ever personally left Figureds where they stood on most characters. But I know plenty of people who do. In which case now they must take those into consideration too - how many points do I spend here? Can I spend less? more? Do I raise my Stun way up? Maybe raise it a little less and afford a Sensory Power in my gadget pool. . . Before, you could only sell back one, so it really wasn't in the juggling of character creation to get all the cool stuff you want and still last more than two phases.

 

It's another point balancing section to trick out.

 

One I welcome. I was all for the decoupling, and am one of those that is happy to see it.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Interesting. I can't say that I've every played in a game (certainly not run one) where what the "normal" amount of Stun for someone with a STR 15' date=' CON 13 and Body 13 was mattered in the least. Generally there was an indication as to what range all of the Characteristics should be at.[/quote']

 

 

Different folks different strokes. In our extended group the only time they base figurers are altered when the character concept calls for them being exceptional or unexceptional in that area.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

The basic complaint is - as I see it - now they must consider those Characteristics in statting out a character.

 

To me its more that the GM will have to establish what the average will be for characters with certain primary stats for you to know what the average should be if there will be a average at all. GM's may possibly have quite different views of this.

 

( My wife is telling not to bother to try to explain but I guess I'm stubborn:D)

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Same statement still holds - whether at the Player Level of GM Level the consideration now must be taken into account rather than letting a formula do the calculation for you and let it be.

[OddHat]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

To me its more that the GM will have to establish what the average will be for characters with certain primary stats for you to know what the average should be if there will be a average at all. GM's may possibly have quite different views of this.

 

( My wife is telling not to bother to try to explain but I guess I'm stubborn:D)

 

I got it the first time, and I saw the point.

 

IMO the Average STUN etc will be more campaign, concept and setting based than stat based, unless the GM chooses to do otherwise. For many games (mine, here), that's not really much of a change. For others, it will be.

 

Your wife, however, has a point. This is Madness: This is the Internet.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I got it the first time, and I saw the point.

 

IMO the Average STUN etc will be more campaign, concept and setting based than stat based, unless the GM chooses to do otherwise. For many games (mine, here), that's not really much of a change. For others, it will be.

 

Your wife, however, has a point. This is Madness: This is the Internet.

 

 

I knew you got it. You always seem to get things even if you disagree. It a great trait . One I try hard to emulate.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

This is Madness: This is the Internet.

 

I thought this was Sparta.

[GamePhil]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

( My wife is telling not to bother to try to explain but I guess I'm stubborn:D)

 

Always try to explain, just never try to convince.

 

What you're describing would certainly be part of the gain that Figured Characteristics give you for whatever small price you have to pay for it, in the same was as the trade-off for not having them is you have to do more work if you want the same package, but can then create any package you want. It comes down to which benefit is more important to each person.

[Simon]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I thought this was Sparta.

 

No....

 

[Edsel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

That describes my wife pretty closely.

 

She likes playing Hero but has no love for the chargen system. Generally for a game, she'd describe what she wanted and I'd whip the character up for her based on her descriptions.

 

As for the whole "extra step" issue, I humbly submit this in the hopes it can help clarify without launching any more diatribes from any camp. When I create characters for any system, I look for points of reference for each attribute to compare against. If I want my character to be stronger than anyone else in his village, what value do I use? Etcetera, extcetera.

 

Before, I could generally leave Figured Characterstics alone, since their base values provided their own reference point, and only change them if my character concept required it.

 

With the way 6e will be set up, I will have to look at each one of those decoupled Characteristics and have to make the judgment as to what its "base" value is in reference to the campaign.

 

You might say "just use the base values from the Figured CHA days." Well yes, I could do that, but since that's no longer the norm (unless the GM sets them to be that way) I can no longer trust the "figured" values to represent the "average" stat.

 

I run the risk of creating a character supposed to be of normal durability who ends up being the first one to go to La-La-Land every time because everyone else pumped their STUN to some ungodly level.

 

Bottom line, it's more than additional math involved. There's character concept evaluation involved, too, which is not as easily dismissed.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Well stated and pretty much in total agreement with my viewpoint.

 

Different folks different strokes. In our extended group the only time they base figurers are altered when the character concept calls for them being exceptional or unexceptional in that area.

 

The vast majority of games that I have played in and run are heroic rather than superheroic. As a result it is less common that people mess much with the figured characteristics. Usually SPD is bought up to the next level and if a character is supposed to be tough we might buy up PD and ED a little. STUN, REC, END are almost never touched and remain at their base (figured) levels.

[Trebuchet]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

The vast majority of games that I have played in and run are heroic rather than superheroic. As a result it is less common that people mess much with the figured characteristics. Usually SPD is bought up to the next level and if a character is supposed to be tough we might buy up PD and ED a little. STUN' date=' REC, END are almost never touched and remain at their base (figured) levels.[/quote']Even in my superheroic games REC, END and STUN tend to be left at their default Figured values unless the character concept is supposed to be higher, such as a brick.

[Tasha]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Yeah' date=' I know you were framing it as part of a larger example, but it's been mentioned a few times as adding complexity, and that just baffles me. I still do roughs on paper and use HD to finish up. I was under the impression that most of us on the boards pretty much had all the normal Hero calculations down pat, kind of a limited form of Lightning Calculator, Only for Hero System Calculations (-1).[/quote']

 

I for one don't mind the changes, but I can see the argument that decoupling the Stats make building effective characters a bit harder for the Noob.

 

In previous editions, if the Noob's character was created with primary stats within campaign guildelines, then their secondary Char's basically fell into a place where the character would do decently without much tweaking. In 6th edition there will have to be guidelines spelled out for the Secondary Stats as well so Noobs don't make totally ineffective characters (ie 2 speed 20 stun and End). It isn't that big of a deal, but the temptation for a noob will be to spend all of their points on things like cool powers, talents and skills while leaving their secondary stats in a sorry state.

 

It's nothing to get one's underware in a bunch though. The greater flexability is worth minor amount of extra work to get the secondaries to a combat effective state.

[Tasha]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I've known several people who loved playing Hero' date=' but hated the math. Most of them would describe their characters to one of us who loved the math and let us make a character that could do what they wanted. Most of the math issues I've seen people have in person have been chargen issues.[/quote']

 

I HATE the math required to make a Hero Character. What I love is taking a concept and breaking it down to the proper skills/powers/Stats required to build it. I love the tool box! So I end up being one of the people who help other folk generate their characters. Sometimes one of the other players and I will hash out good power builds online. It's all quite fun. Hell, when I wasn't gaming much, I would make characters as a way to have fun with the system.

 

Thank goodness for Hero Designer, now I don't have to deal with the math. It figures out everything and keeps everything totaled.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

re: Figured Chars

 

I think at this point its just better to say they were a Feature to some, a Bug to others and the two sides aren't likely to meet eye to eye on it now anymore than earlier.

[OddHat]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

re: Figured Chars

 

I think at this point its just better to say they were a Feature to some, a Bug to others and the two sides aren't likely to meet eye to eye on it now anymore than earlier.

 

They were a feature that was (from a pay for what you get POV) a bit buggy. The bug is now fixed, at the cost of the feature. It's definitely a debate that can go around forever at this stage.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

They were neither a feature nor a bug to me.

 

I just see greater flexibility in decoupling them. And anytime something gives me more choices to mess with, the more open the system gets, and the more I like it.

[Hierax]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

For those people not changing to the uncoupled non-figured Characterisitics, do you lift the restriction on only buying back 1 of them to allow the same range of design possibilities as the new way while maintaining the default structure of the old?

 

That always seemed like a needless restriction to me.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

You already have the same design flexibility. If you wanted to make a character who was an "exception" to the general rule then buy some or all of the relevant characteristics with No Figured. At least I never ran into a character I couldn't build with Figured chars in place.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

For those people not changing to the uncoupled non-figured Characterisitics, do you lift the restriction on only buying back 1 of them to allow the same range of design possibilities as the new way while maintaining the default structure of the old?

 

That always seemed like a needless restriction to me.

 

 

you're probably right but it so doesn't come up with us so I really never even noticed it until mentioned on the boards. No figured characteristics limitation gave you pretty much the same design possibilities as well no figured characteristics seems to me. People just didn't like the price from what I can tell. I used it all the time for powered armor guys.

[Starlight]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

For those people not changing to the uncoupled non-figured Characterisitics, do you lift the restriction on only buying back 1 of them to allow the same range of design possibilities as the new way while maintaining the default structure of the old?

 

That always seemed like a needless restriction to me.

 

That restriction is, sadly, absolutely essential. Otherwise, because of the costings of characteristics, once you allow selling back multiple figured characteristics you can make selling back give you more points than the cost of increasing the primary characteristic to add the figured characteristics you're selling back. To put it another way, the more you buy the less it costs overall.

[Edsel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Since I prefer figured characteristics I will pretty much continue as I have in the past. Normally you can only sell back one figured characteristic but this can be waved at the GMs option. Normally in my games if you had a good character rational for selling back more than one characteristic I might let it slide. But it is not something that I'd want running wild in my games. In my opinion figured characteristics make for more rational character designs. And Starlight brings up a good point about the reason for the restriction.

 

As it stands the decoupling issue and decoupling of CVs is a deal breaker for me (there are other lesser issues as well) and I will likely stick with 5ER and import what I like from 6E. However, I intend to buy 6E and give it a good look. In fact our group's other GM (Eosin) is likely to convert his campaigns over to 6E so I will even play the new rules. Within a few months of its release I should have a much better idea about my feelings toward the new system. Who knows I may even change my mind.

[prestidigitator]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

There's also the missed opportunity of allowing for situational perception; had perception been divorced from INT. The skilled woodsman is going to be highly perceptive in the wilderness. He may well be at a loss in the city. And vice versa for the New York detective heading west after a fleeing criminal in a Wild West campaign.

 

Well, without taking a side of the fence on the Int/Per thing, I would like to point out that it is currently possible to have restricted Perception bonuses. You can buy Perception bonuses to some or all senses using Enhanced Perception, and you can certainly add Limitations to them.

[prestidigitator]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

What he is saying is with figures you know exactly what the normal Stun for a character with STR 15 CON 13 and Body 13 for example' date=' should be automatically. Without, its pretty much up to the GM's whim ans personal sense of scale what the norm would be...[/quote']

 

...or the player's whim, which is the whole point. In decoupling the values, we are eliminating an assumption in the system. Everyone here griping about it seems to believe the assumption is valid, but there have been just as many people arguing for the elimination of Figured Characteristics ever since I've partaken in these boards. Meaning there are plenty of people who believe the assumption is erroneous, too.

 

Should we start arguing about who has more physical protection: a body builder or a fat man? Or who has more stamina: a weightlifter or a swimmer? The argument could last weeks, which is reason enough to question the assumption that was present in the 5E Figured Characteristics.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

...or the player's whim' date=' which is the whole point. In decoupling the values, we are eliminating an assumption in the system. .[/quote']

 

I guess I just can't comprehend the GM wouldn't have a norm and you might be not as weak or tough as you think you are if you don't know his scale. I sure wouldn't like a game with that little rhyme and reason to my mind. I guess either the assumption made sense to you or it didn't.