... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I'm not fond of this kind of arbitrary limits. I'd prefer the avalaible points being the actual limit.

 

Then go play Amber diceless.

 

Every game has arbitrary limits. Same as reality (laws of physics) has arbitrary limits.

 

You just have to set your own limits, or else you are just going to complain and never find a solution - here or anywhere. (I say this as kindly as possible; you are refuting every option or idea we posit.)

[ghost-angel]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

60Pts => 4dK => 42 Stun' date=' 14 Body on the average. (not 12 nor 13, guys ! LOL)[/quote']

 

My numbers were for Energy Blast - 42 Stun, 12 Body.

 

But thanks for incorrectly correcting me.

 

 

Do that from 5 AP to 100 AP. See how the numbers move around. It could be interesting.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

60Pts => 4dK => 42 Stun' date=' 14 Body on the average. (not 12 nor 13, guys ! LOL)[/quote']

 

A 4d6 KA averages 14 BOD, but average STUN is 14 x 2 2/3 = 37 1/3 with a Stun multiple die. The average differs, but is not 42, if using the hit location chart.

[ghost-angel]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I'm not fond of this kind of arbitrary limits. I'd prefer the available points being the actual limit.

 

Active Point Caps are as arbitrary as any other limit out there.

 

Remove them from play, see what happens. Let Players spend the points as they see fit without Limits since you aren't fond of them.

[Sean Waters]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

ATTACK v DEFENCE

 

This is not a straightforward comparison because when you buy defence you are not buying it against one specific attack. If you were, X points of defence D to attack A would stop it - if only just, in some cases:

 

Using average (which mean more with the normal attack than the killing attack) values -

 

12d6 Energy EB (42 Stun 12 Body) v 60 points of ED: no damage through

 

4d6 Energy RKA (42 Stun 14 Body) v 40 points of rED: 2 stun through (negligible)

 

However, like I say, you have to buy the defences to account for several attack types: at the most basic Physical and Energy, but there are various other ways you can take damage. Even ignoring the exotic attacks, that halves the effective defence values if you are going to be balanced:

 

12d6 Energy EB (42 Stun 12 Body) v 30 points of ED: 12 stun through

 

4d6 Energy RKA (42 Stun 14 Body) v 20 points of rED: 22 stun through

 

Those figures are certainly not negligible for the person taking the damage: 2-4 hits will take down the majority of opponents with proportional stun values.

 

If you bear in mind the Hero principle that defences should be significantly cheaper than the attacks they defend against, the cost of defences does not seem to be too far out, if at all. Indeed there is a case to say they cost too much. There are always more attacks to spend defensive points on.

 

Taking a starting character and upping PD and ED to 50, making 20 of each resistant and buying 20 mental and power defence does not make you invulnerable (although you are functionally close against non-advantaged attacks, and assuming a set x3 multipler for KAs) and costs 156 points.

 

Such a character would be very hard to hurt (but would still need decent stats) and would be far from invulnerable: AP, NND, AVLD, Penetrating would all allow damage (sometimes significant damage) through, and we have not even looked at flash defence and life support yet (not thechnically a defence but the nearest you can come to being able to ignore many NNDs).

 

Also bear in mind that we kinda got round any active point caps by buying PD and ED rather than armour. Point caps, unpopular as they are with many, are another balancing mechanism. If we ignore point caps then that applies to atatcks too: we spent 116 points on physical and energy defences. If we spent that on an attack, we'd get a 23d6 EB - damage average 80 stun (30 through defences) or 7 1/2 d6 KA (30 stun and 6 Body through defences).

 

So, defences are not too cheap, no.

[Crypt]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Then go play Amber diceless.

 

Every game has arbitrary limits. Same as reality (laws of physics) has arbitrary limits.

 

You just have to set your own limits, or else you are just going to complain and never find a solution - here or anywhere. (I say this as kindly as possible; you are refuting every option or idea we posit.)

 

 

No need to be rude

 

I really take note of the various variants you all propose.

 

 

 

My numbers were for Energy Blast - 42 Stun, 12 Body.

But thanks for incorrectly correcting me.

 

Keep cool...

[Crypt]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

A 4d6 KA averages 14 BOD' date=' but average STUN is 14 x 2 2/3 = 37 1/3 with a Stun multiple die. The average differs, but is not 42, if using the hit location chart.[/quote']

 

You've summed the localized multipliers and averaged them ?

 

EDIT: i find 2.5.

Head (3,4,5) = 3X5

+

Hands (6) = 1X1

etc......

 

Total: 45/18 = 2.5

 

so 14X2.5= 35

 

Fix:

20rDef version => STUN= (Body x2.5) - (N+R) = 35 - 20 - 5 = 10 STUN

[Kraven Kor]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

No need to be rude

 

I really take note of the various variants you all propose.

 

 

I wasn't being rude. I even put in a disclaimer about my statements being as kindly as possible - in other words, I was not saying what I said in anger or dismissively, simply matter of fact.

 

Your premise appears to be HERO is flawed because the points do not automatically balance everything against everything. We have tried to show you that this is incorrect, offered examples proving it is incorrect, and offered a slew of options you could use to work around the described problems.

 

Yet it appears - to me, at least - that you have a reason why each of our solutions is no good and return to your original position of "HERO is broken, why use it?"

 

Edit: And, again, read this in a conversational tone - I am not angry and have no stake in whether you find a solution or whatnot.

[Sean Waters]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

You've summed the localized multipliers and averaged them ?

 

EDIT: i find 2.5.

Head (3,4,5) = 3X5

+

Hands (6) = 1X1

etc......

 

Total: 45/18 = 2.5

 

so 14X2.5= 35

 

Fix:

20rDef version => STUN= (Body x2.5) - (N+R) = 35 - 20 - 5 = 10 STUN

 

Just (1+1+2+3+4+5)/6

 

If you use a rolled multiplier it makes a mockery of defence efficiency comparisons.

[Crypt]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Just (1+1+2+3+4+5)/6

 

If you use a rolled multiplier it makes a mockery of defence efficiency comparisons.

 

 

Honestly i don't see why, as far as we choose to use average values we get average comparisons, don't we ?

[ghost-angel]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

What's an Average Value of the Armor Power at 25 Active Points? Even Split? 40/60 Split? 70/30 Split?

 

To be safe I must buy both ED and PD - at the very least - as I don't know if I'm going to get hit by an Axe or Lightning Bolt. So, obviously I need some kind of baseline as to which is more effective, or less frequent?

 

Here's a question - does an equal level of Active Points in Defense completely stop an attack of equal level of Active Points - stop 50% - stop 25% - stop 90% of it?

 

What are the base assumptions you think Defenses should act against?

 

What does X Points in Defenses mean versus X Points in Attack?

[Crypt]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

What's an Average Value of the Armor Power at 25 Active Points? Even Split? 40/60 Split? 70/30 Split?

 

To be safe I must buy both ED and PD - at the very least - as I don't know if I'm going to get hit by an Axe or Lightning Bolt. So, obviously I need some kind of baseline as to which is more effective, or less frequent?

 

Here's a question - does an equal level of Active Points in Defense completely stop an attack of equal level of Active Points - stop 50% - stop 25% - stop 90% of it?

 

What are the base assumptions you think Defenses should act against?

 

What does X Points in Defenses mean versus X Points in Attack?

 

 

That's simple: i would not have to worry about the character's spell if 1 CP of Armor would stop 1 CP of K dmg on the average. That's as simple as that. The immediate result would be more liberty for the players and their characters. IMHO this is worth considering.

 

 

By default with 60 CP (40PD) of armor equally spread among PD and ED , with locations rules and a pondered average (*) loc (X2.5 / X1) and, for instance 5 normal PD =>

 

STUN= (Body x 2.5) - (N+R) = 35 - 40 - 5 = -10 = 0

BODY= 14-R = 14-40 = -26 = 0

 

You say

"To be safe I must buy both ED and PD - at the very least - as I don't know if I'm going to get hit by an Axe or Lightning Bolt. "

 

You would be even more safe with a compound power (eg: + mental defense + power defense, etc....)

 

This is a fact: 40 rDef cost 60 CP.

 

 

 

(*) i'm not sure this is the right english word for a "moyenne pondérée"

 

 

If Armor costs the same as K power => 15 points per 3.5 rDef = rounded to 4 pts per 1rDef

It becomes: 60 pts armor => PD15

STUN= (Body x 2.5) - (N+R) = 35 - 15 - 5 = 15 STUN

BODY= 14-R = 14-15 = -1 (instead of -26) = 0

 

The spell would become =

 

Stone Skin

Armor 6 PD/6ED

Base: 48

Hardened (+1/4)

Active: 60

Cost Endurance (-1/2)

Gestures (-1/4)

Incantations (-1/4)

Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2)

Increased End Cost (X3, -1)

Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate

Real : 16 (17 without the Extra Time)

 

Improved Stone Skin

Armor 6 PD/6ED

Base: 48

Hardened (+1/4)

Usable Simultaneously (X4, +3/4)

Active: 96

Cost Endurance (-1/2)

Gestures (-1/4)

Incantations (-1/4)

Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2)

Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate

Real : 35 (or 38 without the Extra Time)

 

Thus i would have a lot more time for working on the scenarios in place of worrying about game balance when dealing with abilities as trivial as a defense spell. (this is trivial compared to weird combos like dK+megascale, for instance.)

 

 

Note : the spell is currently:

Stone Skin

Armor 6 PD/6ED

Base: 18

Hardened (+1/4)

Active: 22

Cost Endurance (-1/2)

Gestures (-1/4)

Incantations (-1/4)

Requires a Magic(Earth) roll (-1/2)

Increased End Cost (X3, -1)

Extra Time (Half Phase; -1/4) to activate

Real : 6 (still 6 without the Extra Time)

 

for the same cost it would become roughly a 2PD/2ED spell. (also remember that such rDef is not localised.)

For a Fantasy Hero campaign i think that this is a decent result for "only" 6 CPs.

It could as well be a 4PD/0ED spell, which is the same as a Brigandine covering all the body.

 

 

Now please tell me = why rDef should be cheaper than dK if everybody put limits on it ? (like 45 pts for Defs vs 60 pts for Atks)

[ghost-angel]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

First - stop comparing Defenses to just Killing Damage.

Second - We do NOT compare Real Cost to Active Cost to determine System Level Capability. We ONLY compare Active Cost to Active Cost.

 

DISCLAIMER: This is NOT the same as saying 1 Character Point stops 1 Character Point. Like you said.

 

You can't ever dump a whole bunch of Limitations on a Power and say "Hey! The System Costs This Too Cheaply For the Active Points!!"

 

Three - I think I found a major disconnect.

 

Hero Combat is not measured in Character Points - it is measured in Damage Classes.

A baseline tenant of Hero is that 5 Points = 1 Damage Class.

 

1 Point of Resistant PD stops:

1 Stun from Normal Attacks

1 Body from Normal Attacks

1 Stun from Killing Attacks

1 Body from Killing Attacks

Cost = 1.5 Character Points.

 

Now, to stop 1 Full Damage Class (5 Character Points) we need to stop:

6 Stun from Normal Attacks

2 Body from Normal Attacks

1 Stun from Killing Attacks (using a 1D6-1 Stun Multiplier)

1 Body from Killing Attacks

 

OR: 6PD/1rPD = 5 Points (5PD) + 1.5 Points (1rPD) = 6.5 Points.

 

Let's move up to a full 1D6 Killing Attack (3 Damage Classes):

18 Stun from Normal Attacks

12 Body from Normal Attacks

30 Stun from Killing Attacks

6 Body from Killing Attacks

 

We Need: 30PD/6rPD

or

24 Active Points PD + 6 Active Points rPD = 33 Active Points

 

For twice the cost we have stopped 1D6 Killing Damage.

 

By your argument Defenses are too expensive, not too cheap. We should drop Resistant Costs to ~.75/1 rDEF and ~.5/1 nDEF. (or some such nonsense)

 

Or did mean something else by 1 Character Point = 1 Character Point

[Crypt]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Let's move up to a full 1D6 Killing Attack (3 Damage Classes):

18 Stun from Normal Attacks

12 Body from Normal Attacks

30 Stun from Killing Attacks

6 Body from Killing Attacks

 

We Need: 30PD/6rPD

or

24 Active Points PD + 6 Active Points rPD = 33 Active Points

 

I don't understand the values you use.

 

3DC= 3dN or 1dK

N: average 10.5 STUN & 3 BODY

K: average 10.5 STUN & 3.5 BODY (if we use locations and the average pondered STUNX and BODYX it would be 8.75 STUN & 3.2 BODY)

 

4 rDef + 7 Normal PD = 6 + 5 = 11 points.

(6 pts of Armor for the 4rDef and 5 pts for +5 PD from a 2 base)

 

Note: Because of figured chars i think it's not fair to add the whole normal PD cost

 

Note: Obviously we must use average values. Using maximum ones when dealing with xD is not significant, mainly when x is high.

eg. 4d => only 1/1296 chance to get the maximum.

[ghost-angel]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Don't add in the Base - we need to figure out from 0 to 0 what the point cost should be.

 

4 rPD + 7 PD = 6 + 7 = 13 Character Points.

 

Looks good to me. I'm out of here.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Doesn’t the book specifically suggest using Adjustment Powers rather than applying Usable on Others with Defensive Powers? Don’t have my book to double check. Regardless, the book does specifically have a provision that Adjustment Powers only have half effect against (or on) Defensive Powers and it is arguable that that limitation should apply to Armor (or any Defensive Power) bought with UBO also. In fact, if I’m remembering correctly about my first point (wish I had my book) it’s not just arguable, it is rather self-evident. Lastly, the Usable On/By Others Advantages are Caution (or are they Stop Sign Powers) for a reason; they may affect game balance . That’s why there is a warning and that is why trying to use a Power with UBO to argue something is priced wrong simply makes for an extremely poor comparison, regardless of your issues with Limitations or anything else.

[ghost-angel]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Using a large chunk of Limitations as an argument for somethings pricing as being incorrect is inherently flawed to begin with, I simply ignored them.

[prestidigitator]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

If for each die of Stun damage you buy 3 of the relevant defense, that defense protects against 70% of the Stun (all rolls are equal probability; for each 1, 2, or 3 rolled on the die, no damage is done; for 4, 5, and 6, the amount of damage done is 1, 2, and 3, respectively, for a total of 1+2+3=6 damage; with no defense, the total potential damage is 1+2+3+4+5+6=21 damage). That seems reasonably good, and half the time the attack will do zero damage.

[Klaus Mogensen]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I have never run a Fantasy Hero game, but played in a few. I have seen something which can be perceived as an imbalance: Warriors can use weapons that add damage for free, while magicians have to pay points for their spells. Hence, if I were to run a game, I would do it this way, which also solves the problem we discuss:

 

Spells exist naturally in the world, they don't have to be bought with points. In order to utilize spells, a magician will need a Magic Skill and proficiency with certain groups of spells, just like a warrior will need combat skill and proficiency with certain groups of weapons.

 

Spells naturally exist with some limitations, e.g. Requires Skill Roll, Costs END, Gestures, Limitations, Extra Time, Concentration, Focus (staff) or perhaps a Variable Limitation that requires at least -1 in a combination of these (in addition to RSR). Possibly all spells should also have the Uncontrolled advantage (but then, Costs END should be mandatory).

 

Hence, the GM writes up what spells are available. Players may suggest something they want, but the GM can say: "Such a spell doesn't exist". This may include protection spells above a certain magnitude.

 

- Klaus

[Markdoc]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Now please tell me = why rDef should be cheaper than dK if everybody put limits on it ? (like 45 pts for Defs vs 60 pts for Atks)

 

Because those limits are ... well, limiting. You're looking at the effect of the spell when it's up and running, forgetting that much of the time people are going to be applying the damage directly to the soft squishy mage without any protection.

 

Let's look at it: he's paying END for the stoneskin (quite a lot of END in the original version), which means he can't have it up all the time. It's not up when he's stunned. It interferes with his ability to cast and maintain other magics in combat. It requires gestures and incantations which means that in many situations it can't be used at all. The improved version has a base cost of 96 active points, which is a -10 on his magic roll ... hope your mage sunk a lot of points into that roll, or he's going to get the benefit of the spell hardly at all.

 

In a real game, your mage is going to be able to use his stoneskin spell only some of the time. And even the base version is a 60 active point power! A 4d6 RKA, which has the same active points cost is going to slice through it like knife through butter. It'll KO the mage in one hit, kill him in two - even if he succeeds in getting the spell up in the first place.

 

Even if you move to a more extreme example where the mage makes his spell 12 PD/0 ED and limit killing attacks to 2.5 d6, it's still no spell of invulnerability. Sure, the mage can shrug off the BOD damage from most sword blows if he gets the spell up, but the first energy-based spell is going to put a big ol' hole in him (and probably stun him, blowing his stoneskin spell, so the next sword blow will finish off what's left). A swordsman with Find Weakness will likely carve him up in sort order. In other words, there's lots of ways around his defence ... which is why it's cheap.

 

A strongish warrior with a longsword can generally put out about 2d6 killing - not even at the top of your damage range. That's 7 BOD and - on average - 19 STUN. So even an average hit will put some STUN through the basic version of his spell - and some BOD.

 

But you need to look at the range of damage, not just the average. 1/6 hits even with average BOD will do 24 STUN and 1/6 will do 35. Even with a PD of 6 and his Stoneskin spell maxed to 12 PD, he's still likely to be wearing significant stun from a few hits, from an opponent not even at the top of your starting damage range. He's far from invulnerable and if he wades into combat expecting his spell to protect his from all damage he's in for a nasty shock in about 3 phases.

 

And in a crosstime game, he might be facing someone with a BAR. 2.5 d6 RKA? The stoneskin spell is going to be a great help, but even if it is maxed out, it's not going to give invulnerability, or even anything close. Remember, it doesn't help much if you bounce 5 hits and the 6th one lays you out unconscious without your protective spell ....

 

Bottom line: by only looking at average damage vs defence and not looking at actual utility, I think you are getting a misleading impression how effective limited defences are, in play. As an experienced FH GM, I'd look at that spell as useful, but not even close to being a gamebreaker.

 

cheers, Mark

[Crypt]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Using a large chunk of Limitations as an argument for somethings pricing as being incorrect is inherently flawed to begin with' date=' I simply ignored them.[/quote']

 

Are you kidding ? In the last examples i used no limitations.

 

 

Don't add in the Base - we need to figure out from 0 to 0 what the point cost should be.

 

4 rPD + 7 PD = 6 + 7 = 13 Character Points.

 

Looks good to me. I'm out of here.

 

That's completely dishonest.

First i have round up values in order to please you, second you don't pay the 2PD base, third you don't repay PD for each armor power, and last armor cost 3CP/2rDef, period.

And of course base PD comes from STR which has his own uses.

 

Now the correct values are =>

3DC= 3dN or 1dK, 15 pts

N: average 10.5 STUN & 3 BODY

K: average 10.5 STUN & 3.5 BODY

N: average with hit locations 9.6 STUN & 2.7 BODY

K: average with hit locations 8.75 STUN & 3.2 BODY

 

N: 3.5 rDef + 7.5 Normal PD => 5.25 + 5.5 = 10.75 points.

K: 3.5 rDef + 7 Normal PD => 5.25 + 5 = 10.25 points.

N: with hit locations 2.7 rDef + 6.9 Normal PD => 4 + 4.9 = 8.9 points.

K: with hit locations 3.2 rDef + 5.6 Normal PD => 4.8 + 3.6 = 8.4 points.

 

I see only the bold costs as the good ones but add the normal costs in order to be a nice boy

 

Note:

averages multipliers from the hit location table:

StunX: 45/18 = X2.5

Nstun: 16.5/18 = X0.912

BodyX: 16.5/18 = X0.912

You may note that the hit loc. rule tend to lower damages on the average but this is another story.

 

 

Doesn’t the book specifically suggest using Adjustment Powers rather than applying Usable on Others with Defensive Powers? Don’t have my book to double check. Regardless, the book does specifically have a provision that Adjustment Powers only have half effect against (or on) Defensive Powers and it is arguable that that limitation should apply to Armor (or any Defensive Power) bought with UBO also. In fact, if I’m remembering correctly about my first point (wish I had my book) it’s not just arguable, it is rather self-evident. Lastly, the Usable On/By Others Advantages are Caution (or are they Stop Sign Powers) for a reason; they may affect game balance . That’s why there is a warning and that is why trying to use a Power with UBO to argue something is priced wrong simply makes for an extremely poor comparison, regardless of your issues with Limitations or anything else.

 

A good argument even if you start from a possibility and finish with a certainty very quickly.

I'm going to ask to S.Long.

[Markdoc]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

I have never run a Fantasy Hero game' date=' but played in a few. I have seen something which can be perceived as an imbalance: Warriors can use weapons that add damage for free, while magicians have to pay points for their spells. [/quote']

 

Yeah, but in 20 years of playing and GM'ing heroic level games, this has never been a problem: the problem has always been the reverse: limiting magic users so that they don't dominate the game. Magic gives so many advantages, that the "free HA/HKA, free armour and CSL" really isn't an issue. We've tried multiple variants on free or reduced cost spells and they always end up with all characters being magic users, even if they don't start that way.

 

If it were just me, then it might be it was my GM'ing style, but it's been all the games of this type I played in as well. The "free stuff" problem is actually a theoretical rather than real problem, IMO and is usually bought up by people who don't play a lot of heroic level games. That's not meant to be a slam, merely pointing out that experience tends to contradict what looks like a problem: I used to worry about it too, when we were first designing games.

 

It's like Ego Attack. I used to worry that it was underpriced, because ... well, it is. But in actual play, that's rarely been a problem (I say rarely, but in my experience, never) - maybe because instead of being underpriced, BOECV is over-priced.

 

cheers, Mark

[Crypt]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

Because those limits are ... well, limiting. You're looking at the effect of the spell when it's up and running, forgetting that much of the time people are going to be applying the damage directly to the soft squishy mage without any protection.

 

Let's look at it: he's paying END for the stoneskin (quite a lot of END in the original version), which means he can't have it up all the time. It's not up when he's stunned. It interferes with his ability to cast and maintain other magics in combat. It requires gestures and incantations which means that in many situations it can't be used at all. The improved version has a base cost of 96 active points, which is a -10 on his magic roll ... hope your mage sunk a lot of points into that roll, or he's going to get the benefit of the spell hardly at all.

 

In a real game, your mage is going to be able to use his stoneskin spell only some of the time. And even the base version is a 60 active point power! A 4d6 RKA, which has the same active points cost is going to slice through it like knife through butter. It'll KO the mage in one hit, kill him in two - even if he succeeds in getting the spell up in the first place.

 

Even if you move to a more extreme example where the mage makes his spell 12 PD/0 ED and limit killing attacks to 2.5 d6, it's still no spell of invulnerability. Sure, the mage can shrug off the BOD damage from most sword blows (if he gets the spell up, but the first energy-based spell is going to put a big ol' hole in him (and probably stun him, blowing his stoneskin spell, so the next sword blow will finish off what's left). A swordsman with Find Weakness will likely carve him up in sort order. In other words, there's lots of ways around his defence ... which is why it's cheap.

 

A strongish warrior with a longsword can generally put out about 2d6 killing - not even at the top of your damage range. That's 7 BOD and - on average - 19 STUN. So even an average hit will put some STUN through the basic version of his spell - and some BOD.

 

But you need to look at the range of damage, not just the average. 1/6 hits even with average BOD will do 24 STUN and 1/6 will do 35. Even with a PD of 6 and his Stoneskin spell maxed to 12 PD, he's still likely to be wearing significant stun from a few hits, from an opponent not even at the top of your starting damage range. He's far from invulnerable and if he wades into combat expecting his spell to protect his from all damage he's in for a nasty shock in about 3 phases.

 

And in a crosstime game, he might be facing someone with a BAR. 2.5 d6 RKA? The stoneskin spell is going to be a great help, but even if it is maxed out, it's not going to give invulnerability, or even anything close. Remember, it doesn't help much if you bounce 5 hits and the 6th one lays you out unconscious without your protective spell ....

 

Bottom line: by only looking at average damage vs defence and not looking at actual utility, I think you are getting a misleading impression how effective limited defences are, in play. As an experienced FH GM, I'd look at that spell as useful, but not even close to being a gamebreaker.

 

cheers, Mark

 

 

well....so there is hope . I will see how it evolves.

[ghost-angel]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

That's completely dishonest.

First i have round up values in order to please you, second you don't pay the 2PD base, third you don't repay PD for each armor power, and last armor cost 3CP/2rDef, period.

And of course base PD comes from STR which has his own uses.

 

You don't count Base because you need to scale up, you need to account for the defenses needed for a wide range.

 

Do not tell me the system is broken based on a single example. Prove it over a wide range, a very wide range.

 

so NO you don't account for the 2PD base, because you need to know exactly how much defenses stop a given attack and then cost those two together.

 

Quite frankly - I must be bored out of my mind to spend this much time on a topic without getting any meaningful numbers back without having to provide them in the first place.

 

As Markdoc pointed out - that Power has some MASSIVE usage limitations, and by your response to him I'm not wondering if you weren't ignoring them.

 

Furthermore - you started off this thread with a heavily limited Power as your proof of a broken cost with no actual comparisons or math behind.

 

Not only has everyone disagreed with you, but some have wavered in the other direction.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: ... armor, limits of limitations,etc.

 

3DC= 3dN or 1dK

N: average 10.5 STUN & 3 BODY

K: average 10.5 STUN & 3.5 BODY (if we use locations and the average pondered STUNX and BODYX it would be 8.75 STUN & 3.2 BODY)

 

4 rDef + 7 Normal PD = 6 + 5 = 11 points.

(6 pts of Armor for the 4rDef and 5 pts for +5 PD from a 2 base)

 

Note: Because of figured chars i think it's not fair to add the whole normal PD cost

 

HTH attacks get two free DC's from STR then, so that 3DC normal attack should only cost 5 points. You can't have a 3DC HKA, since you get 2 DC if you buy 1 DC HKA, and 4 DC if you pay 10 points for a 2 DC HKA.

 

And you could sell your PD back were you so inclined.

 

Note: Obviously we must use average values. Using maximum ones when dealing with xD is not significant, mainly when x is high.

eg. 4d => only 1/1296 chance to get the maximum.

 

Well, let's look at buying 11 PD, of which 4 is Resistant, to offset a 3 DC attack. That costs 13 points, as pointed out numerous times above. A 3d6 roll will come up 11 or less 62.50% of the time, doing no damage. It will get damage through sometimes, though, as follows:

 

rolls 12 11.57% of the time

rolls 13 9.72% of the time

rolls 14 6.94% of the time

rolls 15 4.63% of the time

rolls 16 2.78% of the time

rolls 17 1.39% of the time

rolls 18 0.46% of the time

 

Average STUN damage past 11 defenses will be 0.96 STUN, so you've reduced 3d6 damage to about 1 stun. Under-average damage rolls still do 0, but rolls over average don't.

 

The KA is much more volatile, and numerous past threads have shown how its average damage past high defenses is superior to a normal attack, because the stun multiple is always only 1d6, and fewer dice are rolled. A 1d6 KA averages 3.5 x 2.666667 = 9.33 STUN. However, if you average the damage past defenses from all possible rolls of 1d6 KA, and a standard Stun Multiple roll (not hit locations - I don't have the chart at work) it gets 2.4166667 STUN past defenses. And 2/3 of its hits will do BOD, since 2/3 will be a 5 or a 6. You need to pay another point (total of 14) to have 6 rDEF if you want to avoid BOD damage.

 

All this and you still have not dealt with AP attacks, and you still need Energy Defense, even ignoring exotic attacks.

 

As you note, higher dice reduces the spread, so average defenses become more likely to offset everything. But that KA multiple is still an issue.

 

Let's assume an average BOD roll on a 4d6 KA - 14. You need 14 rDEF to stop that, and you'll still take BOD frequently. I see 20+ fairly often on a 4d6 roll, so let's say 20 rDEF to pick a number. 2 2/3 x 14 = 37 1/3 average STUN, so let's say 50 PD in total. Total cost is the same 60 I would pay for a 4d6 KA. If defenses are, in fact, underpriced, I should be pretty much invulnerable, right?

 

But a 4x multiple on average BOD gets 6 STUN through, and a 5x multiple does 20 STUN. Average stun past defenses (ignoring variation in the 4d6 roll for BOD) is 4.33. Still feeling invulnerable?

 

The final proof is in the pudding. Too many people have played Hero for too long without the supposed undercosting of defenses crippling their games to cause me to believe that the pricing is a problem. Some gamers play a high defenses game, where combat is a very gradual war of attrition. Others play a low defenses game where combat is a matter of first strike. These games have very different feels, but they all work.

 

As has been noted several times already on this thread, it's a matter of setting and abiding by ground rules for the level of attack and defense.

 

Are defenses undercosted? Rather than paying 60 points for defenses, I could pay 30 points (attacks will hurt much more when they hit) and bump my DEX up by 15 (with no figured). With 5 OCV and DCV on you, I'll be missed, and I'll hit, much more frequently. I could use some of that extra OCV on called shots to bump up my average Stun Multiple to carve past your defenses. Raise the price of defenses, and DEX, or DCV, become a much better investment - I won't get hit instead.