Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

[Vondy]

I want to be perfectly clear: I'm not complaining, just ruminating.

 

I decided to convert and reconceive some old fantasy characters to 6E. I've always run skill and maneuver centric games. I'm all for decoupling dexterity and combat values on a conceptual level. But I was looking at the costs of the conversions and realized a huge chunk of the increase in point cost is nested in their combat values: its danged expensive.

 

These characters are old hands in a "sword and planet / swords and sorcery" type environment and should be near the top of the heap, but even so: having OCV.DCV 8.8 is 50 Points! Add in maneuvers (no skill levels at this point) and wowza! Its a huge chunk of points.

 

So I'm left with a few questions: is the new paradigm causing people to lower the scale/benchmarks of combat values in their games? And, what benchmarks are people using for character design in 6E? To wit, mooks, henchmen, protagonists, legends? Or whatever other scale you have in place.

 

I ask because I'm strongly considering dropping the scale. In other words top end fighters like Conan (REH's Stories) or Red Sonja would weigh in at 8.8, some maneuvers and combat skills. And maybe a level or two. They'd be fighting with values between 8 and 10 or 11. I'd leverage assorted defensive talents and skills to model their seeming invulnerability in the face of long odds and "only nicks and scratches" tropes.

 

What is the rest of herodom assembled doing?

[Matt Holck]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

This change in cost will lower the scale of the both OCV(Offensive Combat Value) and DCV(Defensive Combat Value).

What used to cost 6 points (3 points of Dexterity -the Speed figure characteristic) for +1 OCV, +1 DCV

now costs 10 points (5 points of +1 OCV and 5 points of +1 DCV).

 

This means that combat levels and martial maneuvers that adjust OCV and DCV will become more cost effective by comparison.

 

The conversion rate for old characters into 6E could be (Dex/5)+1 for base OCV and DCV levels which offcorse should be paid for. This would reflect what characters pay for CV in 6th edition.

(5 points of dexterity cost 15 - 5 for speed figured=10 point)

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

I must admit that the characteristic changes came as quite the shock to me, and for a while I was not sure what to think. I had long been aware that Dex was too cheap and that ideally things aught to have been structured somewhat differently, but I was also very comfortable and familiar with the way things were. Creating characters was quite intuitive, and the first step was defining their dex to set their baseline OCV/DCV.

 

With the new characteristic costs, things are not so clear, so I welcome your question Vondy. I've been doing a lot of sample character building, monster designing and what not over the last few weeks, trying to get a grip on things. And I have found that I am often leaving base OCV and DCV either at their base levels or just above, relying instead on martial maneuvers, levels, equipment and powers to get OCV & DCV up to respectable heights. That said, those heights are not what they used to be and the goblins of today are no match for the goblins of yore.

[Matt Holck]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

*pulls out a +4 OCV Auto-fire from the realms of genesis* spray and pray

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

The conversion rate for old characters into 6E could be (Dex/5)+1 for base OCV and DCV levels which off coarse should be paid for. This would reflect what characters pay for CV in 6th edition.

(5 points of dexterity cost 15 - 5 for speed figured=10 point)

Your calculation is a good one for benchmarking, for a starting point when doing a conversion. It neatly takes the points that were in Dex and attributes them to OCV,DCV and Speed. It however also leaves the character with a baseline Dex 10 which costs 2 points per to raise, and for some characters, a decent Dex is fundamental to their conception, even if it does not figure into combat value or speed. That's where the extra points for starting characters come in.

 

As a test, I took a 5th Ed. character I posted on another thread recently and converted it to 6th Ed characteristics, to see how the build would turn out. They follow:

A very young Legolas  5th Ed.

10 Str
20 Dex 30
13 Con  6
13 Body 6
13 Int  3
10 Ego
13 Pre  3
Com NA
3 Pd    1
3 Ed
4 Spd  10
5 Rec
26 End
25 Stun
Total Stats: 59

3 +1 Striking Appearance (Girl Magnet)
8 Combat Luck 6 PD/6 ED Does not stack with armor -1/2
21 2D6 RKA, 1/2 Endurance +1/4, Weapon of Opportunity -1/2, Beam -1/4
("Quiver of Infinate Arrows", Arrows are a 'special effect' only.)
8 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Placed Shots
6 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Range Penalties with RKA
6 Penalty Skill Levels w Sight Range Modifiers
10 +5 OCV with RKA
7 +3 DCV Only in Hand to Hand -1
1 Longevity 200 Years (and climbing)
3 +1 Perception
3 Stealth
3 Concealment
3 Tracking
2 Forest Survival
2 PS: Ranger
-12 -6" Running
17 +7" Flight, No Turn Mode +1/4, Invisible Power Effects +1/4, Only In Contact With A Surface -1/4
(Must move along some at least exceedingly, remotely plausible surface.)

Skills & Powers: 91

Total: 150


A very young Legolas  6th Ed.

10 Str
18 Dex  16
13 Con   3
13 Body  3
13 Int   3
10 Ego
13 Pre   3
6 OCV   15
6 DCV   15
3 Pd     1
3 Ed
4 Spd   20
5 Rec    1
25 End   1
26 Stun  3
Total Stats: 84

3 +1 Striking Appearance (Girl Magnet)
8 Combat Luck 6 PD/6 ED Does not stack with armor -1/2
21 2D6 RKA, 1/2 Endurance +1/4, Weapon of Opportunity -1/2, Beam -1/4
("Quiver of Infinate Arrows", Arrows are a 'special effect' only.)
8 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Placed Shots
6 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Range Penalties with RKA
6 Penalty Skill Levels w Sight Range Modifiers
10 +5 OCV with RKA
7 +3 DCV Only in Hand to Hand -1
1 Longevity 200 Years (and climbing)
3 +1 Perception
3 Stealth
3 Concealment
3 Tracking
2 Forest Survival
2 PS: Ranger
-12 -6" Running
17 +7" Flight, No Turn Mode +1/4, Invisible Power Effects +1/4, Only In Contact With A Surface -1/4
(Must move along some at least exceedingly, remotely plausible surface.)

Skills & Powers: 91

Total: 175

Note that absolutely nothing in the Skills & Powers have changed and the stats were kept as close to identical as possible. The higher point 6th edition character is virtually identical to the 5th edition character except for having a base OCV/DCV one lower than the 5th edition version and a Dex of 18 instead of the 5th edition character's Dex of 20.

 

So yes, 6th edition characters are lower powered than 5th. Not by a lot mind you. But if in doing a onversion one attempts to maintain the same base OCV/DCV, one is going to have to do a LOT more fiddling with everything else on the character to make it fit.

 

My advice is when doing a conversion, ascertain that the Skills & Powers match, then match up Characteristics, all except Dex and Speed. Take whatever extra points remain (from that bonus of 25 or whatever it was depending on the power level of your game), add that to the points previously spent on Dex and Speed, and spend those remaining points on Dex, Speed, OCV and DCV. The character will not have the combat value they used to, but if all other characters are subjected to the same process, they should all match up at roughly the same proportions that they used to.

[Matt Holck]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

wow

dexterity still cost 2 for one, I'm stunned

granted, dexterity determines who gets to go first in combat and the dive for cover roll

granted, there are several useful skills based on dexterity

but

strength has a great deal more use in combat.

constitution is the character's stun threshold

body is a character's life points

intelligence determine a great many skill rolls

presence is still imposing

ego determines ego rolls and those rare ego combats

 

I'm surprised all the primary statistics weren't set at a value of 1 for 1

 

does intelligence still determine combat perception?

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

does intelligence still determine combat perception?

As far as I know, yes.

 

In truth, I do think Dex is overpriced and it should be one point per instead of 2. But if Dex is lowered to one point per, what then would be the cost of lightning reflexes? In any case, it is now written in stone, Dex costs two points, despite the fact that all it does is boost your stealth skill. For combat, all a high Dex does is determine who gets to act first, the first time round. After that in my opinion, all that counts is speed. (Yes, having the first shot is nice, but either you 'win' that war and buy enough Dex and combat reflexes to do so, or you've wasted points. And spending 20 or more points just be be able to get the first shot, and still not even being able to be sure of it, seems to me to be a big waste, at least in lower point games where 20 points represents 10-20% of all the points you've got.)

 

Any player character I create from here on out, unless I am trying to be very faithful to a conception and willing to literally waste large numbers of points to do so, will have a very low Dex. If for some reason I want to be able to act first, I'll buy lightning reflexes. If I have a few Dex skills I want to boost, I'll buy levels (3 points for +1 to a tight group). That's a darn sight cheaper than spending ten points to buy Dex up by five.

[Matt Holck]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

8 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Placed Shots

6 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Range Penalties with RKA

6 Penalty Skill Levels w Sight Range Modifiers

10 +5 OCV with RKA

 

Legolas might be doing a few sweep maneuvers

8 Points for called shots to the head?

have stun multipliers changed on hit location?

 

 

 

 

 

But if Dex is lowered to one point per, what then would be the cost of lightning reflexes?

Lightning reflexes would cost 1 point for +2.

 

In any case, it is now written in stone, Dex costs two points, despite the fact that all it does is boost your stealth skill.

Breakfall get a great deal of use in games I play.

Does being on the ground still suffer a 1/2 DCV penalty?

(note with lower CV values, the prone penalty is not quite as severe)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

I'm in agreement that DEX should cost 1 point.

 

INT provides INT skills and PER rolls. PRE provides PRE skills and PRE attacks and PRE defense. DEX provides DEX skills and combat order.

 

I don't think DEX is twice as valuable as INT and PRE. That would imply going first is way more than twice as valuable as PRE attacks/defense, or PER rolls.

 

However, I wonder whether, perhaps, INT and PRE should cost 2 each like DEX. We could then buy "only for skill rolls" at -1 (5 points each) and "not for skill rolls" at the same -1 (PER, PRE attack and Lightning Reflexes). PRE seems the bargain to me, since it also grants PRE defense. I'd like to see that shifted to EGO for several reasons:

 

- PRE is otherwise too valuable, and EGO could stand beefing up

- PRE defense is pretty much essential, so EGO would be purchased. Aren't heroes the strong-willed guys that keep going, through the blinding pain, and against all odds? Sounds like they should have high Ego.

- being impressive and being hard to impress aren't that linked, really.

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

Legolas might be doing a few sweep maneuvers

8 Points for called shots to the head?

have stun multipliers changed on hit location?

Page 85, Volume one: "1 +1 to offset a specific negative OCV modifier with any single attack"

I probably should have written: 8 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Placed Shots to the Head with RKA. Technically this is legal. Whether I would allow it in a game I was GMing is debatable.

 

This was just a for fun design to illustrate a way of building an archer that could use their bow effectively in melee. The conversation we had been having referred on several occasions to Legolas, so I decided to build Legolas while displaying the build for the bow. Given that Legolas constantly demonstrated his ability to unerringly place arrows smack between the eyes of everyone he shot at, it was necessary to include it on his character sheet.

 

Stun multiples on locations have not changed. But I can find no reference to any sweep maneuver. Legolas is simply really good at hitting what he shoots at.

[Matt Holck]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

Ah..

I was thinking of Crow from Hawk the Slayer

that elf had selective fire

 

 

 

precise hit location is fine as long as the damage is scaled down to balance the gain in damage to hit location

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

Ah..

I was thinking of Crow from Hawk the Slayer

that elf had selective fire

 

precise hit location is fine as long as the damage is scaled down to balance the gain in damage to hit location

I suppose in a game where the hand to hand folks are throwing around 3D6 attacks, this Legolas with his precise targeting would not be imbalanced. And growing the character to turn the straight RKA into perhaps a multipower with various effects like autofire and such might be fun. Certainly Legolas was demonstrating abilities along the lines of a multipower. But that was an older Legolas with a lot of experience.

[Nevenall]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

In general my conversions have resulted in lower base CVs and more variation between OCV and DCV, which I really like because my 5th edition characters tended to have excessively high base CV.

For my campaign I’ve made DEX cost 1 point.

SL for all Agility skills cost 4 points like other categories

Lightning Reflexes: for 1 Character you get +2, +3, +4, +5, or +6 DEX for initiative depending on the category.

[Matt Holck]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

Skills at four points a piece is fine.

The value of any given power is based on the points payed.

This increase in price will magnify the respect for skills.

4 point skills also keeps character's from buying skills with a -1 limitation (such as OAF) for 1 point.

 

I suppose in a game where the hand to hand folks are throwing around 3D6 attacks, this Legolas with his precise targeting would not be imbalanced.

an average hit of a 2d6 RKA to the head would cause 7 body 35 stun x2 body after resistance physical defense

 

an average 3d6 KA would cause 10.5 body 28 stun*

*based on the stun multiple die x2.67 though I suspect a roll on the hit location chart would produce a similar value

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

an average hit of a 2d6 RKA to the head would cause 7 body 35 stun x2 body after resistance physical defense.

 

an average 3d6 KA would cause 10.5 body 28 stun*

I always use hit locations. So that average shot to the head would do al of 2 body damage to an NPC wearing chainmail. It would however generate decent amount of stun, averaging at 35. The character swinging an axe with a strength of 23 and martial strike, doing 3D6, will do an average of 4 or 5 body and a couple of points less stun each hit. For that reason I would probably be ok with the player turning their RKA into a 2D6 RKA armor piercing attack with experience. Furthermore, given that the axe wielding character has spent only 26 points to get their strength and basic martial moves, and the character who bought their RKA with points has spent nearly twice that (after accounting for the levels in placed shots and whatnot) I would likely let them buy up the attack to a 2D6+1 Armor Piercing.RKA, and still consider it relatively balanced. And of course by then, the axe wielder will likely be a bit more kick ass as well.

[assault]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

Coming late to the thread: the suggested guidelines for starting points have increased in 6th Edition. That means, that while 6E characters are less powerful point for point, they tend to have more points.

 

At heroic power levels, starting 6E characters seem to have 75 points more than their 5E counterparts. That's... a lot.

 

Throw most of that into Combat Value and you should be fine.

 

I'll admit, though, that I've mainly been looking at superheroic power ranges, so my comments on heroic power levels may not be quite accurate.

[redwulfe]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

Personally I think most combat statistic where on the high side in most game during 5th ed in the heroic band at least. I would like to see characters in the skilled and competent ranges and then have a few shinning individuals that are in the legendary or superhuman bands. The chart on page 48 of the 6th ed rule book is a good example of the bands that I am talking about. Speed for a skilled individual is 2-3 with 4-5 being competent and 6 starting in the legendary range. This should be the standard for most characters even in super heroic games. I play many characters that are skilled combatants and some that are competent but in most games I have been in even the non fighter types have speeds and CV's in the upper competent lower legendary range. To me this should not be so and is a byproduct of power gaming or NPC statistic creep. Most people do not wish to have their characters tossed about willy-nilly, it is very understandable. I usually look at the character concepts of characters that are handed to me and look at these stats for the raw power versus concept balance and will often make them lower there stats if they are outside of there concept. I also, on the other hand, lower NPCs in the same way as to not give my players a raw deal. It is the NPCs in my opinion that will make the creep start and then cause it to go out of control.

 

I also only charge 1 for Dex, it is not that powerful and should not have a cost higher than that of other characteristics, it is a toolkit note in the book that I have used and I don't really see it as a problem as I look over characters very closely in my games.

 

Red

[SirViss]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

I have been thinking about the lower CV benchmarks of the 6ed for a few days now, ever since I got he Basic Rulebook. I don't think it is a bad thing in and of itself, and might lead to more dynamic (or maybe more dramatic ) combats.

 

This is how I see it. If a GM wants to keeps the CV levels that existed as a standard in the previous edition, I see 2 choices. one is to buy up of the basic CVs of characters to match what they were pre-6ed, but as Vondy pointed out that can be VERY expensive. The other option I see is to allow the buying of more Combat Skill levels than before. That would mean that the character might be able to equal what his CVs were before, but he would have to choose where to put his levels. When he concentrates on offense he will be vulnerable, if he concentrate on fighting defensively, his chances of hitting will be lower, or he can split it both ways and be not as effective either way.

 

Anyway, the biggest problem i see for when people try to convert characters from a previous edition. If they cling to the values that existed then (and i would probably try until I took myself to task), more than a few points will be sunk in the basic CVs. More than is warranted in my opinion. After all, if the idea is to have a character who is skill driven, wouldn't it make sense that his CV be more influenced by his CSL than by his innate combat ability.

[Vondy]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

I'd like to thank everyone for their input thus far.

 

I'd also like to encourage more opinions.

 

At present I'm leaning towards one of two options:

 

1. keep CVs but enforce the unfamiliar weapon penalty rule (-3OCV) and pens for weapon length.
   
2. drop combat values altogether and go with a combination of maneuvers and skill levels (and enforce unfamiliar weapon pens).
   

 

Enforcing the Unfamiliar Weapon Penalty means the average peasant/townsman will be OCV 0 with all but everyman weapons. The average mook guard will be OCV 3 + Weapon Bonuses (if any) due to his WFs and DCV 3 + Shield Bonuses. Add in armor and better weapons (a spear giving reach) and he should be heads enough above the masses to do his job. As a result, lowering the scale isn't really an issue. This latter option has the advantage of simplifying design as it removes four characteristics and gives a little flexibility in how one achieves their combat values. On the other hand, the players have to deal with adjusting skill levels at run time (not an issue for me, but I've known players who got confused by it). it also means adjusting the formula for a few things (as in: what does it mean to halve your DCV if you don't have one?). I have to think on it.

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

...drop combat values altogether and go with a combination of maneuvers and skill levels (and enforce unfamiliar weapon pens).

I do not understand why you think dropping combat values would be desirable or necessary. Certainly enforcing unfamiliar weapons rules and such is a good idea (I always have myself), and certainly maneuvers and levels play a major role, indeed the largest role in determining final combat values (at least they do now with 6th Ed. rules). But the base OCV and DCV in 6th Ed. are simply other ways of defining combat potential, no different at all than buying combat levels. For 10 points I can get a combat level that can be applied in all combat, in any of OCV, DCV or damage classes. If I put a limitation of -1 on it, only usable for DCV, it becomes five points, 5 points for +1 DCV. So skip the extra math and just let people buy OCV and DCV normally, in addition to whatever acrobatics they wish to apply to 'other' skill levels. Just my opinion.

[mayapuppies]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

Enforcing the Unfamiliar Weapon Penalty means the average peasant/townsman will be OCV 0 with all but everyman weapons. The average mook guard will be OCV 3 + Weapon Bonuses (if any) due to his WFs and DCV 3 + Shield Bonuses. Add in armor and better weapons (a spear giving reach) and he should be heads enough above the masses to do his job.

This is about where my games stand. I try to limit starting PC Combat Values (including all skill levels and maneuvers) to a max of 8. They can be increased later, but at start I like to keep them lower than 8 if at all possible. This puts them leaps and bounds above the commoner and superior to the common bandit/guard.

[Vondy]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

I do not understand why you think dropping combat values would be desirable or necessary. Certainly enforcing unfamiliar weapons rules and such is a good idea (I always have myself)' date=' and certainly maneuvers and levels play a major role, indeed the largest role in determining final combat values (at least they do now with 6th Ed. rules). But the base OCV and DCV in 6th Ed. are simply other ways of defining combat potential, no different at all than buying combat levels. For 10 points I can get a combat level that can be applied in all combat, in any of OCV, DCV or damage classes. If I put a limitation of -1 on it, only usable for DCV, it becomes five points, 5 points for +1 DCV. So skip the extra math and just let people buy OCV and DCV normally, in addition to whatever acrobatics they wish to apply to 'other' skill levels. Just my opinion.[/quote']

 

You answered your own question. As a characteristic, combat values have been rendered superfluous and amount to a system shorthand. I do not like clutter. Further: what extra math? The formula remains: 11 + Attackers CSLs - Defenders CSLs = To Hit on 3d6. If one wishes to conceal the defenders levels one simply says: 11 + Attacker's Levels = To Hit on 3d6 with MoS being compared to the defender's relevant levels to determine hit/miss results.

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

You answered your own question. As a characteristic' date=' combat values have been rendered superfluous and amount to a system shorthand. I do not like clutter. Further: what extra math? The formula remains: 11 + Attackers CSLs - Defenders CSLs = To Hit on 3d6. If one wishes to conceal the defenders levels one simply says: 11 + Attacker's Levels = To Hit on 3d6 with MoS being compared to the defender's relevant levels to determine hit/miss results.[/quote']

I meant math in the calculation of the DCV level. I can write down:

 

5 +1 Level in Combat (10AP); Only Usable for DCV -1 (5 Real Points)

 

Or I could write in the box that says DCV the number 5. And given that's the way the 6th Edition is written, I see no advantage to changing it.

[Vondy]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

I meant math in the calculation of the DCV level. I can write down:

 

5 +1 Level in Combat (10AP); Only Usable for DCV -1 (5 Real Points)

 

Or I could write in the box that says DCV the number 5. And given that's the way the 6th Edition is written, I see no advantage to changing it.

 

Or you could write:

 

5 +1 Level with DCV.

 

I see no disadvantage in changing it.

[AlHazred]

Re: Combat Value Benchmarks In 6E

 

After a lot of thought, I like the way that CV is decoupled from DEX. It makes it easier to build the rogue who's not very combat-savvy but holds the cup-stacking record, for instance. When you convert a character now, there's the additional benchmarks to consider -- is this character naturally more capable of hitting his target/not being hit, or is it a matter of skill and experience? I've been going back over my character writeups from the last ten years, and there's more thought to be put into them. It's not a simple matter of changing the HD template and going with that!

 

I suspect we'll see lower base CVs in the future, but overall CVs won't change much. I hope it encourages players to come up with more descriptive actions in combat, in an attempt to get circumstance bonuses to attack rolls.