Omcv 1?

[Vondy]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

I think setting MOCV and MDCV at base 0 on the basis that the vast majority of people have no skill whatsoever in mental combat would have been a reasonable alternative. I don't think this harms mentalists at all - a Mentalist investing 12 points in MOCV will need a 15- to hit a target who spent nothing on MDCV, whether that's a 4 MOCV vs 0 MDCV or a 7 MOCV vs 3 MDCV.

 

There would then be nothing for those not using mental abilities to sell back, so no argument. As compared to having a base of 3, and wondering why the whole superteam, except the Mentalist, is seriously deficient in MOCV as compared to normals on the street, or even Incompetent DNPC's. Of course, every incompetent DNPC should start by selling back all mental CV's anyway!

 

Not doing so may stem from an innate desire for similtude. Setting it the same as physical combat gives one "scale of reference" to hang all the combat values on. Its value neutral from where I sit, but I can understand not wanting to explain how 7 OCV and 4 MOCV really are, for all intensive purposes, exactly the same on a statistical/probability level if they have different base values. No, no, dear boy! That four really is as good as the seven! It would make a good many people, especially newcomers who aren't accustomed to hero's implicit principles and underlying math, froward and suspicious. For such indiwijuals, its truth value wouldn't be here nor there.

[nexus]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

I think that sort of thing should be campaign dependent since I can see the logic behind thinking "Why do non mentalists "normals" (not every campaign has a normals/supers divide) even have MOCV in the first place?"

 

Its like everyone having an ESP Characteristic that most characters can't and won't use (and in game it doesn't exist for them) but is just on the character sheet because of a technicality taking up space like Com was said too) because certain characters can buy the ESP power.

 

If I use this I'm probably just going to set MOCVs base to 0 for most campaigns. It borks mentalists a little but it just makes more sense to me. Maybe I'll make a low cost "Latent Mentalist" talent that gives a base 3 MOCV for free and lets th character use certain campaign defined abilities.

 

Hm...

 

Maybe set OMOCV to 0 for anyone that doesn't have a Mental Power/Power that uses it? They get those 3 points for free, like Mental Powers provided Mental Awareness. So the Latent Mentalist Talent You're considering could be priced 1d6 of Telepathy Only to gain active MOCV/Mental Power Perks -2

 

That's kind of dangerous "something for nothing thinking" though.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Not doing so may stem from an innate desire for similtude.

 

I believe that's exactly the reason. It suggests that being below a 3 indicates some deficiency as compared to the average fellow on the street and, since you get points back, you should suffer a detriment for selling it back.

 

Another solution, however, would be NO MORE SELLBACKS. Instead, anything that disadvantages you as compared to the basic template is a Complication with a value equal to the lost characteristics or abilities.

 

You have a poor DCV - you take a Physical Complication - Easily Hit; -2 DCV; 10 points. Physically Weak - 5 STR; 5 points. Dumb as a Post - 5 INT; 5 points. Klutz - 5 DEX; 10 points. Bad Leg -3" Running; 6 points.

[director13]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

 

Another solution, however, would be NO MORE SELLBACKS. Instead, anything that disadvantages you as compared to the basic template is a Complication with a value equal to the lost characteristics or abilities.

 

You have a poor DCV - you take a Physical Complication - Easily Hit; -2 DCV; 10 points. Physically Weak - 5 STR; 5 points. Dumb as a Post - 5 INT; 5 points. Klutz - 5 DEX; 10 points. Bad Leg -3" Running; 6 points.

 

Oooh, and it counts against your limit... I like it!

[Vondy]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

 

Another solution, however, would be NO MORE SELLBACKS. Instead, anything that disadvantages you as compared to the basic template is a Complication with a value equal to the lost characteristics or abilities.

 

You have a poor DCV - you take a Physical Complication - Easily Hit; -2 DCV; 10 points. Physically Weak - 5 STR; 5 points. Dumb as a Post - 5 INT; 5 points. Klutz - 5 DEX; 10 points. Bad Leg -3" Running; 6 points.

 

I'm for it!

 

Indeed, it just became a house rule.

 

Will try to rep.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

I believe that's exactly the reason. It suggests that being below a 3 indicates some deficiency as compared to the average fellow on the street and, since you get points back, you should suffer a detriment for selling it back.

 

Another solution, however, would be NO MORE SELLBACKS. Instead, anything that disadvantages you as compared to the basic template is a Complication with a value equal to the lost characteristics or abilities.

 

You have a poor DCV - you take a Physical Complication - Easily Hit; -2 DCV; 10 points. Physically Weak - 5 STR; 5 points. Dumb as a Post - 5 INT; 5 points. Klutz - 5 DEX; 10 points. Bad Leg -3" Running; 6 points.

 

Isn't that the way it worked in 4E, or 3E maybe? I seem to remember all negative costs being counted as Disadvantages then.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Does no one see the irony in 6E deleting COM because it's a "seldom used and poorly defined" Characteristic and then promptly adding a brand new seldom used Characteristic (OMCV) which is already generating house rules to rectify?

[JmOz]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Does no one see the irony in 6E deleting COM because it's a "seldom used and poorly defined" Characteristic and then promptly adding a brand new seldom used Characteristic (OMCV) which is already generating house rules to rectify?

 

I noticed that

[incrdbil]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Seems cheesy to me. Very' date=' very cheesy.[/quote']

 

Every GM has to decide what is cheese. In this case, Icould see qa GM deciding to forbid selling back OCMV if a character doesn't have any mental powers. Some GM's may not care. If an in-game reason for the player to develop a mental power comes about, they have to dig out of that hole they have dug themselves into.

 

Or, a GM may cheerfully send players into some form of adventure that takes place in the mind--and the MCV's become the only CV's you use.

 

After all, selling off a characteristic to gain points is a sort of complication--and if it never causes problems, then they shouldn't get points for it.

[Hierax]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Isn't that the way it worked in 4E' date=' or 3E maybe? I seem to remember all negative costs being counted as Disadvantages then.[/quote']

 

I thought that they basically were too. The both have negative costs, so in my mind that makes them the same thing.

[casualplayer]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Just like I used to lob Min-Max Bombs (d6 Drain All Characteristics Only 1 Active Point of CHAR Fade Rate determined by how mean I was feeling) at the breakpointeers, someone selling back their MOCV would find themselves needing to Use the Force or break out of an evasive Mental Entangle. If you design your character to be lame, it's my duty as a GM to snatch away your walking stick.

[nexus]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Does no one see the irony in 6E deleting COM because it's a "seldom used and poorly defined" Characteristic and then promptly adding a brand new seldom used Characteristic (OMCV) which is already generating house rules to rectify?

 

OMCV is an odd beast. Its well defined but has exactly one function and that function is exceptionally specialized for a characteristic. It's only useful to certain characters and not in all campaigns To use some of the arguments brought up against Comeliness perhaps that indicates it should be something other than a Characteristic.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Does no one see the irony in 6E deleting COM because it's a "seldom used and poorly defined" Characteristic and then promptly adding a brand new seldom used Characteristic (OMCV) which is already generating house rules to rectify?

 

 

Yep, of course you know I do.

[nexus]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Just like I used to lob Min-Max Bombs (d6 Drain All Characteristics Only 1 Active Point of CHAR Fade Rate determined by how mean I was feeling) at the breakpointeers' date=' someone selling back their MOCV would find themselves needing to Use the Force or break out of an evasive Mental Entangle. If you design your character to be lame, it's my duty as a GM to snatch away your walking stick. [/quote']

 

Why would a character need OMCV to break out of a Mental Entangle?

 

I don't feel its cheesy to want to sell back something that you'll never get use out of that rules allow. It's only what appears to an awkward game artifact that create the impression 3 is "normal" in the first place. The GM should either make it useful (or give it a function that makes player at least consider selling it back) or declare it or even all CVs can't be sold back; they are figuratively at "O" for that purpose. Fix the oddity, don't punish the player.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

In regards to Not selling back your MOCV to 1 because it doesn’t jive to have a super with lower stats than a “normal”, “Who says all ‘Normals’ have 3 MOCV?” I mean, you get 10 of all the (formerly primary) Characteristics, yet many normals have Characteristics around 8. Or has that changed? Maybe the campaign norm is all normals without Mental Powers sold their MOCV down to 1 as well…

[Trebuchet]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

In regards to Not selling back your MOCV to 1 because it doesn’t jive to have a super with lower stats than a “normal”' date=' “Who says all ‘Normals’ have 3 MOCV?” I mean, you get 10 of all the (formerly primary) Characteristics, yet many normals have Characteristics around 8. Or has that changed? Maybe the campaign norm is all normals without Mental Powers sold their MOCV down to 1 as well…[/quote']Does 6E have a defined "Normal Human" included? (You had to search for it in 5ER, but it was there.) If it does, what is the "normal" MOCV?

[nexus]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Does 6E have a defined "Normal Human" included? (You had to search for it in 5ER' date=' but it was there.) If it does, what is the "normal" MOCV?[/quote']

 

Three

[ghost-angel]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Average Person 6E1 p438 OMCV 3

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

I don't know, I don't have 6E yet. My point was more "why assume" than "hey you're all wrong". Besides, even if "Normal Human" is defined, it can still very from campaign to campaign.

[incrdbil]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Ric Romero roleplaying newsflash: GM's may have to decide if players are trying to exploit the system and take action if required.

[rjcurrie]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

I thought that they basically were too. The both have negative costs' date=' so in my mind that makes them the same thing.[/quote']

 

I'm pretty sure you people are thinking of GURPS which worked that way.

 

Hero, as far as I can recall, never had a rule lie that.

[rjcurrie]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Seriously people, all of this nonsense because someone might reclaim six points and spend it somewhere else? Those six points are gonna throw off the delicate balance of Hero characters to a degree never before seen. Oh, please.

 

Oh, and by the way, it's OMCV not MOCV or YMCA or whatever letter combinations you've come up with.

 

And what is this nonsense about superheroes not having Characteristics lower than a normal human? I've certain seen lots of Champions characters over the years with EGO, INT, and others at below the level of a normal human.

 

But I guess with 6th Edition finally out, you all need to find new pointless things to argue about for 50 pages.

[nexus]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Edit: Actually, its just not worth it.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Seriously people, all of this nonsense because someone might reclaim six points and spend it somewhere else? Those six points are gonna throw off the delicate balance of Hero characters to a degree never before seen. Oh, please.

 

Oh, and by the way, it's OMCV not MOCV or YMCA or whatever letter combinations you've come up with.

 

And what is this nonsense about superheroes not having Characteristics lower than a normal human? I've certain seen lots of Champions characters over the years with EGO, INT, and others at below the level of a normal human.

 

But I guess with 6th Edition finally out, you all need to find new pointless things to argue about for 50 pages.

Wow rj, sorry for using the wrong initials when I don't even have the book yet. Shame, shame on me and my family. I shall never show my face here again.

[rjcurrie]

Re: Omcv 1?

 

Wow rj' date=' sorry for using the wrong initials when I don't even have the book yet. Shame, shame on me and my family. I shall never show my face here again.[/quote']

 

I'll just say that the correct name for the Characteristic is in the title of the thread.