6e Characteristics

[PhilFleischmann]

The "Confirmed Changes in 6e" thread grows faster than I can read it, and seems to be largely a rehash of arguments that we already had on the 6e boards. I would like to have a more serious discussion about the way 6e characteristics will work.

 

According to Steve, 6e will have 17 Characteristics:

 

STR

CON

BODY

DEX

INT

EGO

PRE

SPD

PD

ED

REC

END

STUN

OCV

DCV

OECV

DECV

 

The first thing I notice is that since "OECV" and "DECV" are no longer tied to EGO, there's no need for them to be called "EGO Combat Value" - they should just be called "Mental Combat Value" (Offensive and Defensive).

 

Also, since the Characteristic block is changing, it might be a good idea to re-organize the way they're presented on the character sheet.

 

STR, CON, DEX, INT, EGO, and PRE are now only used for Skill Rolls, general CHAR Rolls, and things specific to that Characteristic (such as HtH damage for STR, or resistance to Stunning for CON). So these should be grouped together. (I'll call these "Group A".)

 

BODY, STUN, and END are generally not used for CHAR Rolls, but they are the ones that get "used up" and hopefully recovered, during the course of play. So these can be grouped together. (Let these be "Group B").

 

PD and ED are defenses - Group C. Other defenses which might be added in some campaigns, such as a default amount of Mental Defense, would also go here.

 

SPD and REC are both by themselves, but if we like, we can lump them in with group C, for tradition's sake - "Formerly Figured Characteristics".

 

OCV, DCV, OECV, and DECV (or OMCV and DMCV) are the Combat Values group - Group D.

 

So, what do these cost? My instinct tells me that all of the Group A Characteristics will cost 1 point each. This creates very little net change to the game, except for STR and CON.

 

Group C (including SPD and REC) should probably stay at their currect, 5e costs.

 

For Group B, only BODY should change, and be reduced to 1 per. I suppose.

 

So what should the Combat Values cost? Well, it seems to me they should all cost the same, so as not to make Mentalists too strong or too weak compared to non-mentalists. And it seems best (though I could be wrong) that the "O"s should cost the same as the "D"s. So what should that price be? 5? 3? 2? It's hard to tell. CSL's may very well change in cost also. In 5th, +1 OCV and +1 DCV together cost 6 points for DEX, No Figureds, but you also got the benefit of initiative and DEX Rolls, which seems to have meant that +1 OCV (or DCV) should cost something less than 3 points. Bear in mind that 6e costs are not bound by 5e costs, so each point of one of the CV's could cost 3, 4, or even 5 points, and still work out correctly with other costs.

[Beast]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

Groupings

here is How I see them grouped

 

Group all generate a skill roll and or generate a damage/effect roll

STR

DEX

INT

EGO

PRE

COM(added for those that might still want COM in their games)

 

Group B all are used in status of a character in combat and also in general have no standard skill rolls(CON might be used vs getting drunk or vs special Mental attacks as a substitute for EGO

CON

BODY

STUN

END

RECOVERY

SPEED

 

Group C Defenses

PD

ED

these last 4 are normally zero but I put them here for compleatness

As Combat Luck is a viable way for a normal to have resistant def

mental def can be defines as special training

power def could be defined as a resistance to adjustment powers in a normals game that is using chemicals to alter a character

R/PD

R/ED

Mental def

Power def

 

 

Group D attack and avoidance values(did not use defense as definer, as if you are not hit, your defenses are not tested)

OCV

DCV

MOCV

MDCV

[Alibear]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

Physical:

Str

Dex

Con

PD

ED

OCV

DCV

Body

Stun

Speed

 

Mental:

INT

Ego

Pre

Mental OCV

Mental DCV

 

No end, it's too fiddly to keep track of.

[Sean Waters]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

No need to keep them in their traditional order if we are shaking everything up anyway (although it would maintain a modicum of backward compatibility).

 

Skill Characteristics

DEX

EGO

INT

PRE

STR

 

Combat Characteristics

DCV

OCV

EDCV

EOCV

 

Resistance Characteristics

CON

PD

ED

BODY

END

STUN

 

Other Characteristics

REC

SPD

 

 

 

CV will cost 4 points per point: whilst CSL cost could change, having CV at 3 means that you lose a lot of granularity from CSLs if their cost is reduced accordingly. I can not see their cost going up, so it has to be less than 5, because a 5 point OCV or DCV CSL is more useful than the base characteristic as it can be used for other things, like adding damage.

[Sean Waters]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

Shall we take this to the next level?

 

Skill Characteristics (1 point per point base 10 - 50 points)

DEX

EGO

INT

PRE

STR

 

Combat Characteristics (4 point per point base 3 - 48 points (!))

DCV

OCV

EDCV

EOCV

 

Resistance Characteristics (1 point per point, base as marked - 64 points)

CON 10

PD 2

ED 2

BODY 10

END 20*

STUN 20

 

Other Characteristics (base and cost as marked - 28)

REC 4 (8)

SPD 2 (20)

 

That would make the 'base value' of a character built like that 190 points (or 180 if END remains at 1/2 point), as opposed to the (IIRC) 125 points we currently spend. We get that for free through.

 

Now let us look at a 'typical' brick

 

Skill Characteristics (55 points)

DEX 14 (4)

EGO 11 (1)

INT 10 (0)

PRE 20 (10)

STR 50 (40)

 

Combat Characteristics (12 points)

DCV 4 (4)

OCV 6 (12)

EDCV 5 (8)

EOCV 0 (-12)

 

Resistance Characteristics (107)

CON 27 (17)

PD 12 (10)

ED 12 (10)

BODY 20 (10)

END 40 (20)

STUN 60 (40)

 

Other Characteristics (42)

REC 15 (22)

SPD 4 (20)

 

Hmm. That is a 216 point spend - which is more than you would be spending at present (140 points, but you would have to spend something on +2EDCV, which is 10 points, perhaps).

 

However you slice it, unless we are way out on costs and assumptions, there will be a significant cost increase.

 

 

 

 

*I'm taking a flier here and getting rid of 1/2 point characteristics

[The Main Man]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

Physical

STR

DEX

CON

 

Mental

INT

EGO

PRE

 

Combat

OCV

DCV

OECV

DECV

SPD

 

Health

BODY

END

STUN

REC

[Alibear]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

Nice but PD/ED?

[McCoy]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

According to Steve, 6e will have 17 Characteristics:

 

STR

CON

BODY

DEX

INT

EGO

PRE

SPD

PD

ED

REC

END

STUN

OCV

DCV

OECV

DECV

I don't think this list is official yet, there will also be rPD and rED, and I am still hoping for SIZE (maybe replacing BODY, maybe a new characteristic).

[Fearghus]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I am still hoping for SIZE (maybe replacing BODY' date=' maybe a new characteristic).[/quote']

 

What would such a characteristic do? It seems to me that it would end up being like Com which basically has so few applications in game that it can be handled with perks and/or disadvantages.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

CV will cost 4 points per point: whilst CSL cost could change' date=' having CV at 3 means that you lose a lot of granularity from CSLs if their cost is reduced accordingly. I can not see their cost going up, so it has to be less than 5, because a 5 point OCV or DCV CSL is more useful than the base characteristic as it can be used for other things, like adding damage.[/quote']

 

DCV levels cost 5 points now and don't add damage since they can only add DCV. There is no such thing as a 5 point OCV level, although many of us would allow it. Given that many of us would allow it, 5 points for +1 OCV seems like it's in the ballpark.

 

8 point level then becomes a Multipower of +1 OCV, +1 DCV and +1/2 Damage Classes. Although that does not account for EOCV and EDCV, how many characters routinely switch between mental and physical CV anyway?

 

What would such a characteristic do? It seems to me that it would end up being like Com which basically has so few applications in game that it can be handled with perks and/or disadvantages.

 

Seems to me it becomes the replacement for Growth and Shrinking, meaning it fails some of the tests of characteristics in that:

 

- a reduction has benefits (DCV from shrinking)

- an increase has drawbacks (reduced DCV from growth)

- it modifies other characteristics (higher STR, PD, ED, STUN and BOD from increased size)

 

Seems to me Size is at least as problematic as COM to be a characteristic.

[Sean Waters]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

DCV levels cost 5 points now and don't add damage since they can only add DCV. There is no such thing as a 5 point OCV level, although many of us would allow it. Given that many of us would allow it, 5 points for +1 OCV seems like it's in the ballpark.

 

8 point level then becomes a Multipower of +1 OCV, +1 DCV and +1/2 Damage Classes. Although that does not account for EOCV and EDCV, how many characters routinely switch between mental and physical CV anyway?

 

I'm not sure that is true about DCV levels not adding to damage. Certainly some defense only maneouvres will not do damage so adding damage is not an option, but if you have DCV levels and you are doing (say) a martial punch, I can see nothing in the notes or rules preventing you using your DCV levels to increase damage. It might sound counter-intuitive, but I'm pretty sure it is perfectly legal.

 

Assuming OCV and DCV are of very similar value by my estimation and that would make 5 points the top end for cost, and it should be less than that as you can not add damage using 'straight' OCV/DCV (unless that has changed too).

 

On the MP example, I think you should account for EOCV/EDCV, which would make it a 3 point pool with 5 slots. Swapping DCV for EDCV will happen in proportion to the frequency of mental attacks in the game. Arguably EOCV will be VERY rarely used as most characters will nto have mental attacks, so it could be a 4 point pool with four slots.

 

 

 

Seems to me it becomes the replacement for Growth and Shrinking, meaning it fails some of the tests of characteristics in that:

 

- a reduction has benefits (DCV from shrinking)

- an increase has drawbacks (reduced DCV from growth)

- it modifies other characteristics (higher STR, PD, ED, STUN and BOD from increased size)

 

Seems to me Size is at least as problematic as COM to be a characteristic.

 

If I was writing it and putting in a SIZE characteristic, especially as you can 'set' your CV now, SIZE would determine your BODY, cost 1 point and BODY would cost 2*: the ability to take damage is based mainly on your mass. Although SIZE would determine mass it would not necessarily determine how big you are, to account for different densities. You'd be expected to set your DCV at an appropriate level for how big you actually are, but it would not be a requirement.

 

Your mass would be determined by using the SIZE value in the STR table: what that value of STR can lift you would weigh.

 

It would make more sense to cal it MASS.

 

Of course that would then make Body a figured characteristic

 

...so i'd probably not do that then

 

 

 

* Or 1 to bring Body up to 1 if SIZE was less than 1

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I'm not sure that is true about DCV levels not adding to damage. Certainly some defense only maneouvres will not do damage so adding damage is not an option' date=' but if you have DCV levels and you are doing (say) a martial punch, I can see nothing in the notes or rules preventing you using your DCV levels to increase damage. It might sound counter-intuitive, but I'm pretty sure it is perfectly legal.[/quote']

I'm pretty sure that's not the case. The whole point of a DCV level is that it can only be used for DCV, but applies to all attacks/maneuvers. It wouldn't be that cheap if you could add damage with it. It's basically an overall combat level with a limitation "Only for DCV".

 

Also, I don't see any real benefit to dividing characteristics into "physical" and "mental" because that isn't the way they are used.

 

And the problem of making "every point of INT matter" has not yet been solved (as far as Steve has revealed so far).

[ajackson]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

And the problem of making "every point of INT matter" has not yet been solved (as far as Steve has revealed so far).

I have pondered a theory of 'you can temporarily spend a stat point for a +1 to a roll with that stat' -- which means that a guy with Int 13 can roll once at 13- at a cost of being 11- for the rest of the scene, whereas a guy with Int 14 can roll once at 13- and remain at 12- for the rest of the scene. Not a huge bonus, but possibly good enough, and I find the idea that you can burn out your head by thinking too hard amusing and not entirely unreasonable.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I'm not sure that is true about DCV levels not adding to damage. Certainly some defense only maneouvres will not do damage so adding damage is not an option' date=' but if you have DCV levels and you are doing (say) a martial punch, I can see nothing in the notes or rules preventing you using your DCV levels to increase damage. It might sound counter-intuitive, but I'm pretty sure it is perfectly legal.[/quote']

 

I'm pretty sure that's not the case. The whole point of a DCV level is that it can only be used for DCV' date=' but applies to all attacks/maneuvers. It wouldn't be that cheap if you could add damage with it. It's basically an overall combat level with a limitation "Only for DCV".[/quote']

 

I'm with Phil on this one. DCV levels were really a kludge to let someone have a higher DCV without being able to buy DCV directly,and can now be relegated to the Old Kludge's Graveyard with the use of Summon to simulate Resurrection and similar kludges.

 

It's an 8 point combat level with "DCV only", so that's about -1/2.

 

On the MP example' date=' I think you should account for EOCV/EDCV, which would make it a 3 point pool with 5 slots. Swapping DCV for EDCV will happen in proportion to the frequency of mental attacks in the game. Arguably EOCV will be VERY rarely used as most characters will nto have mental attacks, so it could be a 4 point pool with four slots.[/quote']

 

If we add OECV and OEDCV, we raise the cost of the level with all combat to 10 points from 8. That's not a huge deal, IMO. Has Steve commented on whether there will be any changes in combat skill levels? I don't recall a storm of protests on the "6e Changes" thread, either berating him for making changes or berating him for not doing so, so I assume he's been silent on this area so far.

 

But I note the DC adder is already kludged - it applies to any form of damage, with any number of advantages, so it could easily be several dozen slots on its own. And we have no real mechanic for free-floating damage adders (other than Deadly Blow, I suppose, but that's a thread all its own).

 

If I was writing it and putting in a SIZE characteristic' date=' especially as you can 'set' your CV now, SIZE would determine your BODY, cost 1 point and BODY would cost 2*: the ability to take damage is based mainly on your mass. Although SIZE would determine mass it would not necessarily determine how big you are, to account for different densities. You'd be expected to set your DCV at an appropriate level for how big you actually are, but it would not be a requirement.[/quote']

 

So what purpose does Size actually serve? It gives you BOD, but you buy that separately. In gives you weight but, apparently, not knockback resistance (which you buy separately) or any other effects of mass (stun, defenses, etc.). You can easily design a character whose body mass is more than his STR can move.

 

More and more, I look at DI, Growth and Shrinking and question whether they should all be replaced with "just buy the component parts, link and limit to your satisfaction and be on your merry way - it's not an ability unto itself so much as a special effect for a group of abilities".

 

I have pondered a theory of 'you can temporarily spend a stat point for a +1 to a roll with that stat' -- which means that a guy with Int 13 can roll once at 13- at a cost of being 11- for the rest of the scene' date=' whereas a guy with Int 14 can roll once at 13- and remain at 12- for the rest of the scene. Not a huge bonus, but possibly good enough, and I find the idea that you can burn out your head by thinking too hard amusing and not entirely unreasonable.[/quote']

 

I've considered allowing a fourth d6 for skill rolls. If you just muss, but the fourth die is less than or equal to your score in the relevant characteristic in excess of the rounding breakpoint, you succeed. Thus, if you have a 13 INT, you have a 12-, but if you have a 16 INT, you still have a 12-, with a 50/50 (3 in 6) chance of success if you roll a 13.

[schir1964]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I'm not sure that is true about DCV levels not adding to damage. Certainly some defense only maneuvers will not do damage so adding damage is not an option' date=' but if you have DCV levels and you are doing (say) a martial punch, I can see nothing in the notes or rules preventing you using your DCV levels to increase damage. It might sound counter-intuitive, but I'm pretty sure it is perfectly legal.[/quote']

Not for DCV Levels that apply to all attacks and is considered "constant/persistent". And it is an optional rule via GM permission in the combat skill levels section if I remember correctly.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I have pondered a theory of 'you can temporarily spend a stat point for a +1 to a roll with that stat' -- which means that a guy with Int 13 can roll once at 13- at a cost of being 11- for the rest of the scene' date=' whereas a guy with Int 14 can roll once at 13- and remain at 12- for the rest of the scene. Not a huge bonus, but possibly good enough, and I find the idea that you can burn out your head by thinking too hard amusing and not entirely unreasonable.[/quote']

Not a bad idea at all! It may not be quite the right solution, but it's the start of a good idea. There are a number of good possibilities for "spending" or gradually losing points of INT. Say, lose 1 INT on each badly failed INT roll, spend one INT to succeed on an INT roll you missed by one, etc. You gain back all your lost INT (or maybe just your REC in INT) with a good night's sleep.

[Sean Waters]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I'm pretty sure that's not the case. The whole point of a DCV level is that it can only be used for DCV, but applies to all attacks/maneuvers. It wouldn't be that cheap if you could add damage with it. It's basically an overall combat level with a limitation "Only for DCV".

 

Also, I don't see any real benefit to dividing characteristics into "physical" and "mental" because that isn't the way they are used.

 

And the problem of making "every point of INT matter" has not yet been solved (as far as Steve has revealed so far).

 

 

I'm just looking at the rules - they say you can use CSLs to add damage, they do NOT say you can not use DCV levels to add damage ergo there is no differentiation in utility between DCV levels and othere levels as far as the rules go. If that isn't right I can not see where the exception is noted.

 

My prefered option for making every point of INT count, just because it is simple, is to use each 'supernumary' point as a one-use +1 bonus per session. It is easy to account for. At the GM's option you can use more than 1 supernumary point for a single roll. So a 15 INT would be a 12- roll with 2 'one use' +1 bonuses to an INT roll per session. We could call them inspirationms if we wanted. Or not. In fact you could build it like this:

 

+5 INT (5 Active Points); 1 Charge (-2), Concentration (1/2 DCV; -1/4) - and then it would cost 1 point anyway: you have to 'stop and think' and you can only use it once per day. Perfik.

 

I find myself slightly distressed that PER is still based on INT. Never did understand why humans had better PER rolls than animals because, you know, they don't.

[archermoo]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I'm just looking at the rules - they say you can use CSLs to add damage, they do NOT say you can not use DCV levels to add damage ergo there is no differentiation in utility between DCV levels and othere levels as far as the rules go. If that isn't right I can not see where the exception is noted.

 

Well, the entry for CSLs lists 3 things (really 4 but the last two are just different versions of each other) that CSLs can be used for. OCV, DCV, and Damage (different versions for Heroic and Superheroic). So it stands to reason that a level purchased only for DCV could only be used for, well, DCV. Which is to say that "DCV only" isn't the same as "not for OCV".

 

Just like levels that are purchased as "OCV only" can't be used to add damage. Damage isn't OCV.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

My prefered option for making every point of INT count, just because it is simple, is to use each 'supernumary' point as a one-use +1 bonus per session. It is easy to account for. At the GM's option you can use more than 1 supernumary point for a single roll. So a 15 INT would be a 12- roll with 2 'one use' +1 bonuses to an INT roll per session. We could call them inspirationms if we wanted. Or not. In fact you could build it like this:

 

+5 INT (5 Active Points); 1 Charge (-2), Concentration (1/2 DCV; -1/4) - and then it would cost 1 point anyway: you have to 'stop and think' and you can only use it once per day. Perfik.

 

Now sell it to the guys who think tracking END is "too much work". Track your DEX, PRE and INT bonuses as well?

[Sean Waters]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

Well, the entry for CSLs lists 3 things (really 4 but the last two are just different versions of each other) that CSLs can be used for. OCV, DCV, and Damage (different versions for Heroic and Superheroic). So it stands to reason that a level purchased only for DCV could only be used for, well, DCV. Which is to say that "DCV only" isn't the same as "not for OCV".

 

Just like levels that are purchased as "OCV only" can't be used to add damage. Damage isn't OCV.

 

That makes perfect sense: I hadn't thought that all the way through.

[Sean Waters]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

Now sell it to the guys who think tracking END is "too much work". Track your DEX' date=' PRE and INT bonuses as well?[/quote']

 

It could be optional so the people who care that each point should count can make it count. In fact it doesn't need to be a rule, even though that would be neater - those that care can just build it that way and record INT like this:

 

INT 15 : INT roll 12-OO

 

The two 'O' characters can be crossed through when you use the +1 Bonus (that is how I record and track charges anyway).

[Sean Waters]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

The consequences of decoupling

 

A couple of thoughts occurred to me thinking about decoupling characteristics. I’m not thinking of concept realisation here, I’m thinking of the new ‘balance of logic’ for characteristics. There’s a munchkin in us all.

 

1. CON – as CON is almost exclusively used for determining whether you are stunned by an attack, and only very rarely (at least in most of my games) used for a CON roll, there will be less pressure to have 3s and 8s: a CON of 24 or 25 or 26 or 27 will have as much proportional value as a 23 or 28. That is a good thing as it removes the logical reason to buy certain values, increasing variation.

2. EOCV – Everyone who doesn’t have a mental attack power is going to buy this back to 0, aren’t they?

3. DCV and OCV – because these are not lock stepped, I can see a lot of brick types, who often expect to get hit in any event buying back their DCV (or simply not investing in it) and buying up their OCV so that they can hit targets. The effect of that generally will probably be to lower overall CV levels. Interesting development if I’m right as it will make normals more able to hit supers (they probably still can not generally hurt them, but they can at least hit them: most bricks currently have a 5 or 6 DCV which is hard for a normal to hit.

4. DCV and OCV (2) – another consequence of the decoupling is that I’d expect average OCV to be higher than average DCV, and that characters whose defence is avoiding damage will have the high DCVs, whereas all characters will have relatively high OCVs. That will mean that bricks will block and martial artists will dodge. Well they do anyway, but it should be more pronounced.

5. STR will become basically just a way to cause damage, lift and throw. HtH attack will become a lot more desirable if it retains the ‘pass on advantages for free’ feature it has at present. Personally I think that needs changing as part of the overall strategy (hopefully) for simplifying damage adds. In fact HtH could easily change to a 3 point per 1d6 power or disappear altogether in favour of limited STR (+STR No lifting or throwing -1/2).

6. EGO will be only used as a resistance value for mental and PRE attacks and for EGO rolls. Because it will be cheap (I’m assuming the cost will drop to 1 point per point) a high EGO is attainable for most heroic characters – which seems quite appropriate.

7. SPD will become much more of an investment as it will not then benefit from high DEX. This could mean the cost will drop OR it could mean that average SPD will drop.

8. END will be far more of a consideration. At current costs, END is usually at quite a high starting value as it benefits from CON increases. This will mean that reduced END will probably become much more widespread: buying END up to 50 points will cost at least 15 points (AND I would not be surprised if END cost increases: part of the reason for getting rid of COM was that ½ point characteristics are fiddly).

9. STUN will become an almost painful investment. That’s 20 points (at least) in most superhero games right there. I would anticipate the reaction to this being more of an investment in defences – much cheaper to

10. REC will also be a painful investment – not a bad thing IMO – it will slow down the rate of recovery from combat, which is more realistic. At present a standard brick enjoys around 15+ REC: that will cost (unless the cost changes) over 25 points. Of course if STUN and END are lower anyway, the need for REC reduces, but that also slows BODY recovery, perhaps making the use of healing powers more widespread.

 

Whatever happens I think there will be quite far-reaching and probably unexpected consequences of the change as people re-evaluate the merits of relative build strategies. I think a shake up is a good thing, personally, as it looking at your assumptions about the relative worth of characteristics – and other parts of the character – can only be a good thing. Time will tell. It is worth bearing in mind that mechanically, in game, the way in which the characteristics work has not really changed – this is all about build cost, and what makes practical sense in that context.

 

Thoughts?

[mallet]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I'm willing to bet that there will be no starting values for any of the characteristics in 6th ed. All characteristics will start at zero and you build "from the ground up". No need to sell back stats if you want them lower, etc... Just buy them up to what you want. I think it fits with granularity of the system and the fact that there are no more figured characteristics and CV's are bought separately.

 

The only change will be giving more starting points at CharGen to make up for the loss of "free" base points in stats.

[McCoy]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

What would such a characteristic do? It seems to me that it would end up being like Com which basically has so few applications in game that it can be handled with perks and/or disadvantages.

Would make Growth and Shrinking make more sense. I can see where maneuvers such as move through could be based on SIZ rather than STR. If it replaces BODY you don't have the situation where a mouse and an elephant both have 10 BODY pips.

[McCoy]

Re: 6e Characteristics

 

I'm willing to bet that there will be no starting values for any of the characteristics in 6th ed. All characteristics will start at zero and you build "from the ground up". No need to sell back stats if you want them lower, etc... Just buy them up to what you want. I think it fits with granularity of the system and the fact that there are no more figured characteristics and CV's are bought separately.

 

The only change will be giving more starting points at CharGen to make up for the loss of "free" base points in stats.

Care to bet rep?

 

 

It's a sucker bet, it's already been announced that the CV's will have a base value of 3.

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.

 

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.