Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sir Ofeelya

Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

Recommended Posts

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

Blur!! went through three or four different builds in the course of that campaign, because we could never seem to get her quite right. At first, she just had a really high DEX, but she was scarily effective in combat because of that. Much more effective than the concept called for, so the GM asked (and I agreed) to redesign her.

 

The second build was closer to what I envisioned for the character (the build I described up above), but it was so inefficient. I left a ton of points on the table because of all the stuff I had to buy to get her right, so she ended up being considerably less powerful than the other PCs (I had to drop a ton of skills and other powers to get the points to balance).

 

Finally, we went back to something like the original build, but (IIRC) gave her a PhysLim: No Good In A Fight (-4 OCV). Which is a kludge, but it more or less worked for the campaign. Obviously, I feel that buying OCV and DCV separate from DEX is a much more elegant and intuitive solution (and not just for Blur!!; there's lots of character concepts that it works for, IMX).

 

She was a fun character to play, but a real bear to build right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

On the whole COM thing:

Com 12 = 1/2 d6 Striking Appearance, limited group

Com 14 = 1d6 Striking Appearance, limited group; OR 1/2d6 Striking Appearance

Com 15-16 = 1d6 Striking Appearance

Com 18 = 1d6 Striking Appearance, plus 1/2 d6 Striking Appearance, limited group; OR +2d6 Striking Appearance, limited group

Com 20 = 1.5 d6 Striking Appearance, OR 1d6 SA + 1d6 SA LG, OR 2.5d6 SA LG

COM 22 = 2d6 SA/3 d6 SA LG/any combination thereof

 

On closer scrutiny, the Talent system actually enables greater granularity, PLUS a clearly defined in-game effect for appearance, as opposed to the fairly vague official rules regarding COM in the original game. If someone has the equivalent of a 4-6 COM, they can take a DF or Social Complication: Physically unattractive, to reflect that. If they're shockingly ugly, they can take a different kind of Striking Appearance talent for that.

 

I was resistant to getting rid of COM, but I find the new system more appealing now. If you want to restore "appearance" as an "everyman" stat, just write in a line for "App" and put "+0" for a "normal" appearance, "+X" for striking appearance, etc. It's a minor kludge, yes, but if you play around with the SA talent, you may find it more workable than you think--it's certainly not some apocalyptic, game-breaking thing they got rid of--if it was that important, why was there no real pressure in the previous two editions to make that stat more meaningful?

 

 

Ah, but I've pulled a few stitches off the wound...best to just back away slowly, while smiling and nodding my head...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steamteck

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

I really didn't want to go over old ground but I'm with Markdoc. It seems you've way overcomplicated what was a simple solution. of course it seems to me even a incompetent fighter with super speed and reflexes would effectively be pretty effectively competent. after all her enemies are mostly moving in slow motion. ( maybe that's my problem I can't get stuff like that to make sense to me) Maybe buy back her familiarity with her fists LOL. Go outside the box and buy negative skill levels

 

Figurers comes down to preference I know. the separation just breaks my sense of suspension of disbelief and elegance of design so completely it may be years before I can look at it without a elemental response. the CV break was what finally did it for me.

 

COM- I would have preferred it be expanded on rather than dropped. As I've mentioned before COM as opposed to the way GURPS does it was one of the selling points for my group on HERO. We like the comparative number. Striking appearance is just less meaningful to us no matter what you back it with.

 

RexMund-- If you mean Unified power replaces ECs then i must have gotten the same version of 6th that many of the people her seem to have gotten of 5th because I don't see. I don't think multiple similar powers are worth anywhere near full cost and unified power isn't really quite make it for me.

 

The whole you get a certain amount of points and "justify" them with complications doesn't work for our group. we have disadvantage levels all over the board from just a little over 100 to much more and it always worked for us. The disadvantages always worked for us to make tall the characters competitive . the new way seems really restrictive. Make the character till tis done and stop is our motto.

 

I could go on but i really don't see the point. I'm glad the new stuff works for you and you're welcome to go on how wonderful it is but if you try to convince me . its just going to make me vocalize my objections again. Steve and co is still getting my business Just I confined my core book to PDF basic. I'm looking forward to many other things just not the retreads as I said.

 

Speaking of which The folks here are way smarter than GURPS , who kind of got mired in the retreads by having cool NEW stuff on their agenda. I'm so glad HERO can still make a profit on real books also unlike Steve Jackson games. Well done guys. looking forward to amny of the new releases which will be useful even for stick in the muds like me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

Gotta say....Great examples on all sides of the Blur!! conversation... :D Just from a trouble shooter point of view, I lean towards the 6e version without a doubt. Though, I can also say I have done my share of kludge, it's not something I miss anymore....

 

Like Comliness......since I granularized the Striking Appearence to a scale very similar to what Megaplayboy scripted up there. My one Uber Power Gamer player ......(Ever create one of those monsters by accident, heh......I've created three of them), he misses Elemental Control because he was well....the worlds most uber power gamer point cruncher obnoxious plumber on the planet. Talking a good Month elapsed time for him to create a character. It had to be fine tuned that much and then fine tuned again in comparrison to the rest of the party.....

 

BUT, even he has admitted the "need" that he felt to be that way to be on the same "comic scale" as the rest of the players, isn't there with 6th, just simply because of the greater granularity control one can effect with Talents, and the Build examples like Blur!!.....

 

That's the cool thing about threads like this when they work right. :D Both sides got good points and good examples and since I play all editions, it's good to see all examples.

 

~!Rex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

One of the issues I had with COM in the old edition was that, mechanically, you got oddities like there being no functional difference mechanically between, say, an 18 COM and a 22 COM. Both got you the same complimentary roll, and if you added dice to PRE attacks, the same number of dice added. But an 18 cost 4 points and a 22, 6. Also, the half point per point thing meant, in practice, no odd-numbered COM scores. Which reduced it from 31 points of granularity(from 0 to 30) to 16. And once you factor in the undifferentiated values, you get a scale like this:

0/2: 9- roll, no dice added

4/6: 10- roll, half die added*

8/10/12: 11- roll, 1 die added*

14/16: 12- roll, 1.5 dice added*

18/20/22: 13- roll, 2 dice added*

24/26: 14- roll, 2.5 dice added*

28/30: 15- roll, 3 dice added*

*--if adding 1d6 for every 10 points of COM over 0; subtract 1d6 if you start at 10 COM instead

7 meaningful levels of granularity, in all, for most campaigns. I got more than that out of SA, just going from a "12 COM"(1 point on appearance) to a "22 COM"(6 points on appearance).

 

You also get to make distinctions like "well, she's very attractive to most people, but if you're really into buxom redheads, she's sizzling hot" or "most people wouldn't find him attractive, but chicks who dig nerds will think he's cute". You can also write up Talents like Babe Magnet: +4 SA, limited group: women with at least one level of SA (...the intermediate version of this adds some Luck dice, and the strongest version tosses in a Summon...).

"Comeliness wars" have been considered almost universally annoying in virtually every campaign I've ever played. I don't terribly miss that particular aspect of the old stat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

I really didn't want to go over old ground but I'm with Markdoc. It seems you've way overcomplicated what was a simple solution. of course it seems to me even a incompetent fighter with super speed and reflexes would effectively be pretty effectively competent. after all her enemies are mostly moving in slow motion.

 

Sure. Against normals, she was great. OCV 6 is pretty good when you're fighting people with DCV of 3 or 4. Not as useful against battle-hardened supervillains.

 

( maybe that's my problem I can't get stuff like that to make sense to me)

 

I guess that would be a problem. Maybe none of your players has ever come up with a concept like this, but outside of your group, it does happen. People come up with ideas that are just a little bit different; they want to play a character just a little bit different.

 

Maybe buy back her familiarity with her fists LOL. Go outside the box and buy negative skill levels

 

Of course. This is Hero. There's probably a half-dozen ways to do what I wanted to do, some better than others, some more kludgy than others. And now, there's one more: Buy DEX, OCV, and DCV separately. It's simple, elegant, and does exactly what I want to do. And it doesn't eliminate any of the other ways of doing things, if someone wanted to do it differently. You can still do it the old way ("I've got a 30 DEX, which means I should also buy a 10 OCV and DCV"). But this is another tool in the toolbox, and speaking from experience, it works beautifully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

Indeed, Blurr!! is an easy build. Somewhat inefficient, yes, but not difficult. As others have pointed out, just use a Physical Limitation to represent her complete lack of combat ability. Or simply "sell off" her Everyman WF-Unarmed combat, which would apply a -3 OCV penalty to fighting with her fists.

 

Thus you could do Blur!! with a DEX 28 which gives CV 9, but her OCV would always be 6. give her another +5 DCV Levels (25pts) for a DCV of 14 (pretty good for a speedster) Don't forget Martial Dodge and the other evasive maneuver (I forget the name...+4DCV F/Move). Defense Maneuver IV so her Defensive Combat Skill Levels are essentially Persistant unless she's sleeping or stunned (forgot about that one, didn't you!) or you could simply purchase Defensive Combat Skill Levels with the Persistant advantage applied to them (yes, they are 5pt levels, so it works! Another one you forgot about) and absolutely no need for Combat Luck or having to buy Dex Skill Levels or buying up individual Dex skills with this particular writeup.

 

Is it easier in 6th? Probably. Seems to me that it is a bit easier to customize such concepts to your specifications in 6th. Thats always a good thing. But i've never had a problem with these particular sorts of writeups, even back in the 4th edition. Then again, I tend to think outside the box when it comes to character creation. I have no problem with piling on the Skill Levels or Lightning Reflexes or other Limited Characteristics to get the character where I want them to be. Personally, I would probably write up Blur!! with a Dex of 20, +10 Lightning Reflexes, +5 DCV Levels bought Persistant, Defense Maneuver IV, Speedster Martial Arts concentrating on Escapes and Dodges, +5 Combat Skill Levels with her Martial Art. I wouldn't buy up her Dex skills at all because the way I see it, being a speedster doesn't make you any better at Acrobatics, driving or climbing, you just do those things much faster than other people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

Agreed

there is little reason to couple DCV with OCV

 

 

in first

martial arts would give DCV bonuses but no OCV bonus

in fact, the offensive strike had a -2 OCV penalty

further, one could take a half move to do acrobatics to gain another +2 DCV with a -1 OCV for the half move

 

This resulted in high DCV character that are always moving with a relatively low OCV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steamteck

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

I was going to counter but we're just going over old ground. I'll just bow out with saying I'm just not seeing anything including examples I couldn't do already and too much work to get other things back to where I want them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

On a side note, the new rules require a rewrite of some builds. For example, Kinetik in Champions 6e has the same Dizzying Spin Drain DEX that he had in Champions Universe 5e - BUT it no longer affects OCV and DCV! I think that was an oversite, and that the build should have had Expanded Effect at the +1 level to affect OCV and DCV as well. Also note that the DCV Drain has half effect, due to its being a related defensive ability... maybe also buy twice the dice to Drain DCV. (Assuming that the intent was to duplicate the 5e Power.)

 

Also, all the HKA writeups I remember top out at 2x the base DCs, even though that's no longer the standard rule.

 

These aren't *problems* with 6e per se - just a reminder that you have to keep the rules changes in mind when designing to make sure you get the right effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

anyone who filters advantages on an HKA through its strength should probably pat a proportionate amount into the HKA

to reflect the strength gaining that advantge like armor pierce or selective fire

otherwise

High strength characters can gain advantages for the strength (such as Effects Disolid)

by placing those advantages on a 1 pip HKA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

as far as I am aware the DCV characteristic still goes to zero when you do anything that has 0 DCV limitation. so Blur!! as written would be no harder to hit than the average Joe (or Jane) when Stunned. I wonder if there is any advantage you could apply to DCV that could make it less reduceable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

as far as I am aware the DCV characteristic still goes to zero when you do anything that has 0 DCV limitation. so Blur!! as written would be no harder to hit than the average Joe (or Jane) when Stunned. I wonder if there is any advantage you could apply to DCV that could make it less reduceable?

 

I don't think so. I think you could buy a Limited form of CON that would allow this, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

as far as I am aware the DCV characteristic still goes to zero when you do anything that has 0 DCV limitation. so Blur!! as written would be no harder to hit than the average Joe (or Jane) when Stunned. I wonder if there is any advantage you could apply to DCV that could make it less reduceable?

 

Stunned is 1/2 DCV. KOed is 0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

I don't think so. I think you could buy a Limited form of CON that would allow this' date=' though.[/quote']

 

Because of the inherent problems in the build, I might just go with some Damage Negation.

 

I might also allow someone the option of purchasing Persistent for their DCV. Actually, that probably sounds like the best option. Always On might also be appropriate since the levels can't be turned off. This could be a real problem if your teammate needs to touch you to heal you or give you Flight or catch you when you are falling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

I have mentioned elsewhere the need for persistent DCV bonus to simulate very small creatures (which remain very small even when stunned or unconscious - it is easier to hit an unconscious person than an unconscious fly)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

Blur!! went through three or four different builds in the course of that campaign' date=' because we could never seem to get her quite right. At first, she just had a really high DEX, but she was scarily effective in combat because of that. Much more effective than the concept called for, so the GM asked (and I agreed) to redesign her.[/quote']

 

This is a great example. To comment: First, we find that Blur!! is a much more effective and cost-effective character if we just follow the standard that all high DEX characters are combat wizards. The system encourages this link, and this type of character. By extension, it discourages characters who lack this link by making them less effective and less cost-efficient.

 

The second build was closer to what I envisioned for the character (the build I described up above)' date=' but it was so inefficient. I left a ton of points on the table because of all the stuff I had to buy to get her right, so she ended up being considerably less powerful than the other PCs (I had to drop a ton of skills and other powers to get the points to balance).[/quote']

 

IOW, making the character LESS effective costs MORE points. Something is wrong with that picture. The system is actively discouraging characters with high DEX, but poor OCV.

 

Finally' date=' we went back to something like the original build, but (IIRC) gave her a PhysLim: No Good In A Fight (-4 OCV). Which is a kludge, but it more or less worked for the campaign.[/quote']

 

Phys Lim - so you reduce your disadvantages in other areas, or add this for no points. Kludge - agreed.

 

The one possibility not mentioned is buying 17 DEX, +13 DEX "does not enhance OCV". So what limitation do we put on that? Maybe -1/2? That implies DEX only for OCV would be a -2 limitation (so the sum equals the cost of DEX), which puts the cost of OCV at 3 points - when it costs 2 to have +1OCV for just one attack. But you're still getting DEX rolls, Speed and DCV - -1/2 seems like the highest possible reasonable limitation.

 

Obviously' date=' I feel that buying OCV and DCV separate from DEX is a much more elegant and intuitive solution (and not just for [i']Blur!![/i]; there's lots of character concepts that it works for, IMX).

 

With one caveat, discussed below, I agree.

 

I have to admit I would just have built Blur!! with a high DEX to start with and then limited her because she's crap in a fight. :)

I actually have a character like this in my current FH game - she's an archer and a scarily effective one (interestingly - in FH archers can be among the most effective fighters - in D&D, unless augmented with magic, they're rubbish ....). But she's no good at HTH combat, reflected by the fact the fact that she "freezes up" if enemies get too close (I handled that by a psychological limitation, but it could have easily have been a limitation on DEX).

 

That said, I'm not too fussed by the lack of Figureds. I would have preferred to see the costs balanced off and retain them, but uncoupling was (to me) a clear winner over leaving things as they were.

 

I agree and that's my caveat referred to above. A bit of extra work could easily have been done to give those desiring Figured's the ability to retain them.

 

Let's assume the 6e costs are appropriate, first. [i would argue DEX is not, and others think STR is not, but that's another thread - or about a dozen other threads by now - anyway.] What would it cost in 6e to buy everything the stat got in 5e?

 

In 5e, +10 CON provided 10 CON (10 points), 2 ED (2 points), 2 REC (2 points), 5 STUN (2.5 points) and 20 END (4 points) for a total of 20.5 points. OK, buy CON at 2 points per, and get the same figured's as 5e. There's a small package deal (2.5%) for buying CON instead of buying everything separately. No Figured on CON becomes a -1 limitation.

 

In 5e, +10 BOD provided +10 BOD (10 points) and +10 STUN (5 points), so make BOD cost 1.5 points. No Figured on BOD becomes a -1/2 limitation.

 

In 5e, +10 STR provided 10 STR (10 points), 2 PD (2 points), 2 REC (2 points) and 5 STUN (2.5 points) for a total of 16.5 points. OK, this one is tough to price. 1 2/3 points per STR makes the math hard. So maybe we fine tune the formuli - why does STR bump REC and/or STUN? Let's shift the formulas around so the numbers work better.

 

In 5e, +15 DEX provided +15 DEX (30 points), +5 OCV (25 points), +5 DCV (25 points) and +1.5 SPD (15 points) for a total of 95 points. So price DEX at 6 points (WOW! - but that's what you get if you accept the components are accurate) for a 5.26% savings if you take the whole package. No Figured on DEX is a -5 (!) limitation.

 

In 5e, +15 EGO provided +15 EGO (15 points), +5 MOCV (15 points) and +5 MDCV (15 points), so EGO becomes a 3 point characteristic. No Figured on EGO is a -2 limitation.

 

Back to STR. Let's remove Figured from STR entirely. Then we'll change the following:

 

Let's make +20 BOD provide +20 BOD (20 points) and x2 for STUN = +40 STUN (20 points), so make BOD cost 2 points. No Figured on BOD becomes a -1 limitation.

 

Now we can remove STUN from the CON package and add some REC and PD, so let's have +10 CON provide 10 CON (10 points), 2 PD (2 points), 2 ED (2 points), 4 REC (4 points - divide CON by 2.5), 0 STUN (0 points) and 20 END (4 points) for a total of 22 points. OK, if we leave CON at 2 points per, there's a 10% package deal for buying CON instead of buying everything separately. No Figured on CON stays -1 limitation. 10% is higher than I hoped for, but if we put "Unified Power" on all the components, we get a 20% savings, so it's not the end of the world.

 

Now, you can keep figured's if you want (and get rid of the "you can only sell back one" restriction). The link that so many people value can be retained. Meanwhile, we can build Blur!! by purchasing limited DEX and then buying up DCV and SPD, or by buying normal DEX and selling back OCV. The best of both worlds.

 

APG 2?

 

I was going to counter but we're just going over old ground. I'll just bow out with saying I'm just not seeing anything including examples I couldn't do already and too much work to get other things back to where I want them.

 

True, but those examples could only be done in a way that, in my view, disadvantaged those concepts thereby discouraging them, making the old way unbalanced. That said, I don't think eliminating figured's was necessarily the only way to go. But, having balanced the costs, did Figured's still serve a purpose? Mechanically, probably not. But conceptually, perhaps they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

I have to admit I would just have built Blur!! with a high DEX to start with and then limited her because she's crap in a fight. :)

I actually have a character like this in my current FH game - she's an archer and a scarily effective one (interestingly - in FH archers can be among the most effective fighters - in D&D, unless augmented with magic, they're rubbish ....). But she's no good at HTH combat, reflected by the fact the fact that she "freezes up" if enemies get too close (I handled that by a psychological limitation, but it could have easily have been a limitation on DEX).

 

That said, I'm not too fussed by the lack of Figureds. I would have preferred to see the costs balanced off and retain them, but uncoupling was (to me) a clear winner over leaving things as they were.

 

cheers, Mark

It's a tangent, but my current Pathfinder character is an archer and he is pretty nasty. While he has a magic bow, even without it he is sick...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

I think that the gestalt debate around how Figured CHAR could be recosted and recalculated is exactly what led to their decoupling.

 

But nowadays I'm quite satisfied with not having Figured CHAR because it is far more cheese-resistant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

The cheesiest stuff in Hero tends to be overall limitations that don't really limit the character as much as the points you saved would indicate, and compound limitations on powers that add up to -2 overall, but might actually be more like -0 half the time, because someone just took 8 "-1/4" lims, or 4 "-1/2" lims that happen to rarely coincide with each other. Bonus cheese if the so-limited power happens to be an attack with +2 in advantages...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

 

It's a tangent' date=' but my current Pathfinder character is an archer and he is pretty nasty. While he has a magic bow, even without it he is sick...[/quote']

 

Back in 1E/2E AD&D with the brown class/green(?) race "splat" books the Amazon/Wild Elf-Druid/Ranger/Wild Mage combo was a archer god...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...