Regeneration Costs

[Sean Waters]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

That's a pretty meaningful 'almost' date='' then, if it's still causing the same old problem.[/quote']

 

 

IIRC we kicked around the idea of changing regeneration frequency by applying a +1/2 per time chart level advantage to REC. That means +4 would get you REC/Turn, and cost 10 points for regeneration (well, REC+8 points). The current system works in a similar way but costs more, but I think you get the same overall effect.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

There's long been a simple way to cost regeneration that's consistent with the normal healing rules and doesn't give you too strange a cost structure. I can't recall if it came from FUZION or if several folks suggested it on-line at various times, but I've been using it since the 90s.

 

Cost Regeneration based on the time increment, only. Use REC for the amount of BOD recovered. You start out at normal healing: REC/month. You buy a little regeneration, it becomes REC/week. You buy a lot, it's REC/turn. Simple.

 

 

I like 5 points per step on whatever time chart you use. (Personally, I rather liked the 4e Time Chart)

 

 

Quite right' date=' and it's the one that was adopted almost exactly as you describe into 6th Ed, so I'm not sure what your point was, there. The only difference is that you buy the REC up the time chart on individual points of REC rather than REC as a whole.[/quote']

 

That's a pretty meaningful 'almost' date='' then, if it's still causing the same old problem.[/quote']

 

The issue raised by the OP was that it is much more expensive to purchase large increments of REGEN over long time periods than small increments over smaller time periods.

 

Cost Power

14 Regeneration (7 BODY per Week)

4 Regeneration (1 BODY per Day)

 

96 Regeneration (24 BODY per Day)

8 Regeneration (1 BODY per Hour)

 

24 Regeneration (3 BODY per Hour)

10 Regeneration (1 BODY per 20 Minutes)

 

96 Regeneration (12 BODY per Hour)

12 Regeneration (1 BODY per 5 Minutes)

 

It seems pretty obvious that your approach of buying Regen based on a time period would not solve this. You would charge 5 points to recover per week, 10 for per day, 15 for 5 hours, 20 for per hour, 25 for per 20 minutes, 30 for per 5 minutes, 35 for per minute and 40 for per turn. So I can spend 5 points and get back my recovery (whether that REC is 4 or 40) every week instead of every month. Or I can spend 10 and get that back per week (so my extra 5 points gets me an extra 12 or 120 BOD per month).

 

If I spend 20 to get my REC back per hour, I could spend another 20 to make that per turn - which bumps me up from 4 per hour (40 per hour) to 1,200 (12,000) per hour. I also think 40 points is a lot to regenerate per turn given per minute or 5 minutes would still recover all my BOD between most combats. In many games, per hour, 5 hours or , in some, per day would even do the trick.

 

What your approach does do is substantially reduce granularity. If I have a 10 REC, how do I regenerate 1 BOD per hour? Spend 15 to recover per 5 hours, then take a -1 limitation that I only get half as much BOD per time increment and hope my GM is OK spreading that 5 points evenly over the 5 hours instead of a 5 point bump once every 5 hours? Spend 20 to recover every hour, then apply a -9 limitation to cut the recovery rate to 1/10 of my Recovery?

 

Finally, Hero strives for a structure where you get what you pay for. I don't consider a fixed cost for acceleration of a variable regeneration/healing level to meet that criteria. I don't see Regen primarily as an outgrowth of REC (although "an advantage on REC" seems a more reasonable approach, since the cost now varies with the extent of REC). However, that's not inconsistent with the current system Recovery of 1 BOD per turn costs what, 16 points? That's a +16 naked advantage on 1 point of REC. Recovery per week is a +2 maked advantage, and it moves in 2 point increments up the time chart.

[Opal]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

The issue raised by the OP was that it is much more expensive to purchase large increments of REGEN over long time periods than small increments over smaller time periods.

I believe one example was 96 points for 24 BOD/day vs 8 points for 1 BOD/hr, yet both let you heal the same amount in a day. Whether there's pro-rating makes a difference, of course: it makes the more expensive version even worse!

 

 

It seems pretty obvious that your approach of buying Regen based on a time period would not solve this.

Sure it would. For one thing, a character's REC isn't likely to be varied based on his Regeneration goals - REC is mostly about how fast you recover END & STN. If you want to regenerate per day, you'd just buy it per day, and regenerate REC/day. If you want to regenerate REC/hr, you'd buy that. Sure, a character with 4 REC and regeneration per hour regenerates faster than one with 20 REC and regeneration per day - but then, the former has spent more on Regeneration, and the latter character recovers STN and END a lot faster due to spending more on REC. They're both getting what they paid for, they just paid for different things.

 

 

You would charge 5 points to recover per week, 10 for per day, 15 for 5 hours, 20 for per hour, 25 for per 20 minutes, 30 for per 5 minutes, 35 for per minute and 40 for per turn.

Something like that. The version I used back in the 90s went up to per segment for 65pts, IIRC, and had adders for recovering from permenant injuries (regrowing limbs and the like).

 

So I can spend 5 points and get back my recovery (whether that REC is 4 or 40) every week instead of every month.

Actually, you're paying 9 points to recover 4 END/STN per turn and 4 BOD per week vs 85 points to recover 40 END/STN per turn and 40 BOD per week. So, no, I don't see a problem with that.

 

 

What your approach does do is substantially reduce granularity.

I think of it more as making you pay only for meaningful granularity. If you Regenerate per turn, for instance, you'll be healed up between most combat whether your REC is 4 and your BOD 20 (in about a minute) or your REC is 10 and your BOD 10 (one turn flat). In-combat, of course, the higher REC is better.

 

If I have a 10 REC, how do I regenerate 1 BOD per hour?

I think the better question is why do you /want/ to? Why not regenerate 10 per 5 hours? Isn't that close enough? I suppose you could take a -1/4 limitation on 5 of your REC 'limitted: doesn't recover BOD', save 2 points and regenerate 5BOD/5hrs. Though I think -1/4 would be a bit high for most campaigns. Hero has a /lot/ of granularity issues, if you want something very precise, just buy up to the nearest thing you can get. Like, if you want your magic wand to have 7 charges, you pay for 8.

 

Finally, Hero strives for a structure where you get what you pay for. I don't consider a fixed cost for acceleration of a variable regeneration/healing level to meet that criteria.

But you do see paying 96 points for 24/day regen and 8 for 1/hr as 'getting what you paid for?' Seriously?

 

I don't see Regen primarily as an outgrowth of REC

You recover BOD/month based on your REC. Regeneration is about recovering body faster than normal. Seems like a pretty reasonable connection to me.

 

Heck, say you have a REC of 8, and you buy Regeneration of 1/week. You just paid to heal more slowly than you already do!

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

I think the better question is why do you /want/ to? Why not regenerate 10 per 5 hours? Isn't that close enough?

No, no it's not.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

Sure it would. For one thing' date=' a character's REC isn't likely to be varied based on his Regeneration goals - REC is mostly about how fast you recover END & STN.[/quote']

 

I aree. Which makes it a poor choice to link your REC to the speed with which Regeneration works.

 

Actually' date=' you're paying 9 points to recover 4 END/STN per turn and 4 BOD per week vs 85 points to recover 40 END/STN per turn and 40 BOD per week. So, no, I don't see a problem with that.[/quote']

 

No, you're paying 0 points to recover 4 END/STUN per turn and 4 BOD per month or 36to recover 40 END/STun per turn and 40 BOD per month (REC costs 1/1 at a base 4 in 6e). You are then paying a further 5 points to either recover 4 BOD per week or 40 BOD per week (an extra 12 or 120 per month, more or less). Hopefully, we can agree that 120 is more than 12, and 5 is the same as 5.

 

I think of it more as making you pay only for meaningful granularity. If you Regenerate per turn' date=' for instance, you'll be healed up between most combat whether your REC is 4 and your BOD 20 (in about a minute) or your REC is 10 and your BOD 10 (one turn flat). In-combat, of course, the higher REC is better.[/quote']

 

Of course, if my Regen is per hour, or per day, 4 REC and 20 BOD is much less likely to recover from a serious wound before the next combat than 10/10. As well, 4 REC and 20 BOD cost more than 10 REC and 10 BOD.

 

I think the better question is why do you /want/ to? Why not regenerate 10 per 5 hours? Isn't that close enough?

 

One can as easily ask isn't the current regen costing close enough. So no, it's not close enough. It's twice as fast. It has other issues if one's GM does not pro rate the regen over time.

 

I suppose you could take a -1/4 limitation on 5 of your REC 'limitted: doesn't recover BOD'' date=' save 2 points and regenerate 5BOD/5hrs. Though I think -1/4 would be a bit high for most campaigns.[/quote']

 

Above, you suggest that the cost of Regen is for fast healing of BOD, and the cost of REC is mainly about STUN and END. Now you want me to take a limitation on my fast healing of BOD on my REC instead of my regen. Which is it?

 

But you do see paying 96 points for 24/day regen and 8 for 1/hr as 'getting what you paid for?' Seriously?

 

I see paying 96 points for 24/day regen as poor execution of your concept. Spending 8 for 1/hour is the clearly preferable approach. I don't see buying Healing, 5d6 STUN (standard effect 15 CP = 30 STUN) and Healing, 2d6 END (standard effect 6 CP = 30 END), reduced reuse rate (per turn), Self Only, 0 END, PErsistent, Always On as an appropriate substitute for buying +30 REC, either.

 

Heck' date=' say you have a REC of 8, and you buy Regeneration of 1/week. You just paid to heal more slowly than you already do![/quote']

 

No, you get back 1 BOD per week plus 8 per month. Your REC does not cease healing BOD simply because you also have Regen. Similarly, I can't use 1/2d6 Healing, Stun on my opponent and replace his usual 40 REC at PS 12 with recovering 2-6 STUN.

[Opal]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

No' date=' you're paying 0 points to recover 4 END/STUN per turn and 4 BOD per month or 36to recover 40 END/STun per turn and 40 BOD per month (REC costs 1/1 at a base 4 in 6e).[/quote']I was talking about the system I used, that was under 4e. I'm not sure how, exactly a similar thing would work in 6e (for one thing, 6e's higher point totals would probably make 5 pts per doubling slightly cheap).

 

 

You are then paying a further 5 points to either recover 4 BOD per week or 40 BOD per week (an extra 12 or 120 per month, more or less). Hopefully, we can agree that 120 is more than 12, and 5 is the same as 5.

5 is not the same as 41. It's certainly not the same as 77, which would have been the Apt difference between the two options you're comparing under the verysion of regeneration I used back in the day. Of course if you have 77 Apts in something it'll be better than having 9. 'You get what you pay for,' remember?

 

 

One can as easily ask isn't the current regen costing close enough. So no, it's not close enough. It's twice as fast. It has other issues if one's GM does not pro rate the regen over time.

I don't think the issue that's plagued regen has ever been granularity. It's that the way it was bought wasn't rational. It leads to paying many more points for basically the same thing.

 

Pro-rating is an interesting issue. Probably, not pro-rating would be the best aproach for a 6e implementation of the kind of Regen I'm talking about. If you want to regenerate faster, you pay more points for it, so you should get a benefit, even compared to someone who regenerates slower but has more REC, getting that first bit of BOD back sooner is that advantage.

 

Under the 4e version, if you had 10 REC and you limitted 9 of it (and your GM generously gave you a -1/4), you'd save about 3 points on your REC. And you'd heal 1 BOD/month instead of 10. If you bought the interval to 1/hr, you'd be paying more, even net of the savings for the limitation, to regenerate less in total, than you would if you left your REC alone and tooke regen at only per 5hrs (10/5hrs) - without pro-rating, though, 1/hr would still have the minor advantage of giving you some healing /sooner/ than 10/5hrs. So, could have your granularity, and still not be completely hosing yourself. Of course, the potential cost irregularities were talking here are on the order of a few points, not 88...

 

 

 

Above, you suggest that the cost of Regen is for fast healing of BOD, and the cost of REC is mainly about STUN and END. Now you want me to take a limitation on my fast healing of BOD on my REC instead of my regen. Which is it?

There is no dilema. REC is /mainly/ about STN and END, but it also heals BOD, that's a very small aspect of it's utility, so losing it is a very small limitation (in games where BOD damage is rare, or faster healing is readily available, it's no limitation at all). Again, it's a 'get what you pay for' issue.

 

 

 

I see paying 96 points for 24/day regen as poor execution of your concept. Spending 8 for 1/hour is the clearly preferable approach.

That was the argument in the old days. We figured that if you wanted slow Regen, you just took minimim-cost (20 for 2 BOD/turn) Regen and limitted it - it didn't make sense to start with 40 or 60 points of Regen. But those were the 'Goodman' days, when half the fun was point-shaving. Since then, we've seen opinion shift to the wierd "If there are two ways to buy something, the more expensive way is the right one" and then to the current 'you get what you pay for' goal. If you pay 96 points to the same thing as 8 points, you're not getting what you paid for, are you? It's not like 1st, where you had to come up with a hinky limitation to slow your regeration down, is it? Isn't simply buying up the amount of regen just as straightforward and obvious as making it faster in 6th?

 

No Regenerations was flawed, but workable, early on becaue the philosophy of character design was oriented more towards system mastery, and the existance of obvious but inefficent way of building things was just entertainment at the expense of the newbies. Now, though, the game is supposed to be less about radical point-efficiency, and more about fun - and simply 'getting what you pay for.'

 

No, you get back 1 BOD per week plus 8 per month. Your REC does not cease healing BOD simply because you also have Regen.

I was wondering about that. It's not entirely counterintuitive, not as bad as having to buy running up from 0 even though everyone moves six. But it's not quite as elegant as simply buying up from the REC/month you start with.

[Opal]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

Since I've been defending it, I might as well dig it up. This was the Regen variant I used back in the day. Old-timers might remember seeing it.

 

 

Regeneration:

 

This special power allows a character to recover BOD more

rapidly. Normally, BOD heals at a rate of 1 per point of

Recovery each month. Each 5 pts of Regeneration moves that

recovery rate one step up on the time chart - up to 35 pts which

allows the character to heal his REC in BOD each turn (on post-

segment-12). For 45 pts, the character can heal BOD every time

he takes a recovery (including post-segment-12). Characters

wishing to recover from wounds even faster should consider taking

Damage Reduction with the special effect of instantly healing.

 

Regeneration can go beyond merely speeding healing. For +10

pts the character's rate of Regeneration is unaffected by

environmental factors or levels of exertion. For +15 pts, he

does not 'bleed' (doesn't lose BOD after being reduced to 0 BOD or

suffer from the effects of the optional bleeding rules). The

character can also regrow lost limbs and recover completely from

the effects of Disabling wounds for +10 pts.

Regeneration cost: 5pts per step on the time chart. Heal

BOD on each Recovery for 45pts. Ignore environment/exertion

for +10 pts. Does not bleed +15pts. Regrow limbs +10.

Minimum cost 10pts.

 

As you can see, nothing explicit about pro-rating. IIRC, I was generally OK with pro-rating, though. By my standards this was really a pretty straightforward variant. I tend to get overly wordy and detailed. I believe the add-ons were prettymuch lifted from the 4e Automaton rules.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

I was talking about the system I used' date=' that was under 4e. I'm not sure how, exactly a similar thing would work in 6e (for one thing, 6e's higher point totals would probably make 5 pts per doubling slightly cheap).[/quote']

 

Your approach makes a shift to, say, per 5 minutes cost 30 points. If I have a 25 REC and a 5 SPD, that equates to 1 BOD Regen under the current model, which IIRC ccosts 16 points. While it would be much cheaper under your model to have 25 BOD Regen, I rarely see characters down 25+ BOD (certainly rarefor characters still among the living).

 

5 is not the same as 41. It's certainly not the same as 77' date=' which would have been the Apt difference between the two options you're comparing under the verysion of regeneration I used back in the day. Of course if you have 77 Apts in something it'll be better than having 9. 'You get what you pay for,' remember?[/quote']

 

Yup. And in your example point values, the characters paid to have a high REC for END and STUN. Then they paid to recover BOD faster. The two are separate. Having 77 AP in Energy Blast gives you a better attack than having 5 AP in Energy Blast and 72 in Force Field.

 

Under the 4e version' date=' if you had 10 REC and you limitted 9 of it (and your GM generously gave you a -1/4), you'd save about 3 points on your REC. And you'd heal 1 BOD/month instead of 10. If you bought the interval to 1/hr, you'd be paying more, even net of the savings for the limitation, to regenerate less in total, than you would if you left your REC alone and tooke regen at only per 5hrs (10/5hrs) - without pro-rating, though, 1/hr would still have the minor advantage of giving you some healing /sooner/ than 10/5hrs. So, could have your granularity, and still not be completely hosing yourself. Of course, the potential cost irregularities were talking here are on the order of a few points, not 88...[/quote']

 

So how much would we charge a character who wants more REC that only recovers BOD? The above simply indicates your system creates different cost irregularities, rather than eliminating cost irregularities. And I remain of the view that paying 96 points to recover 24 BOD per day is not indicative of a costing issue, but of a poor understanding of the rules. The character heals 1 BOD per hour, so spend 8 points for 1 BOD per hour. If you want to heal 24 BOD at the stroke of midnight, talk your GM into a "delayed effect" limitation on your regeneration.

 

Let's say, under your model, I have a 7 REC, and I want to regenerate 24 BOD per day. How do I do that? Buy +17 REC that only heals BOD (presumably very cheap, since the vast majority of REC's value is in the ability to recover STUN and END, as your reluctance to allow even a -1/4 limitation when those abilities remain makes clear) and spend 10 to regenerate daily? That's a lot more expensive than limiting 6 REC to not recover BOD (which might save me a point if you feel generous) and spending 20 to Regenerate hourly. Not on the same order of 96 vs 8, but 20 vs 10 (with that 17 extra REC being 1 point, which I doubt...) is still doubling the cost.

 

That was the argument in the old days. We figured that if you wanted slow Regen' date=' you just took minimim-cost (20 for 2 BOD/turn) Regen and limitted it - it didn't make sense to start with 40 or 60 points of Regen. But those were the 'Goodman' days, when half the fun was point-shaving. Since then, we've seen opinion shift to the wierd "If there are two ways to buy something, the more expensive way is the right one" and then to the current 'you get what you pay for' goal. If you pay 96 points to the same thing as 8 points, you're not getting what you paid for, are you? It's not like 1st, where you had to come up with a hinky limitation to slow your regeration down, is it? Isn't simply buying up the amount of regen just as straightforward and obvious as making it faster in 6th? [/quote']

 

The meta rule actually says that, if selecting between two equally valid builds, the more expensive one should be selected. It does not say to compare a straightforward build to a convoluted and irrational build. We buy, for example, a Mental Blast, not a Blast, AVAD Mental Defense, AVACV mOCV vs mDCV. IPE, LoS Range Modifier, only works against one class of minds. And we don't build it as Transform - target to target who has just lost xd6 of STUN vs Mental Defense, AVACV mOCV vs mDCV. IPE, LoS Range Modifier. There is no requirement to seek out means of increasing the cost.

 

No Regenerations was flawed' date=' but workable, early on becaue the philosophy of character design was oriented more towards system mastery, and the existance of obvious but inefficent way of building things was just entertainment at the expense of the newbies. Now, though, the game is supposed to be less about radical point-efficiency, and more about fun - and simply 'getting what you pay for.' [/quote']

 

My games were never about "radical point efficiency", but they also weren't about ludicrous point inefficiency. Getting what you pay for isn't just about disallowing dubious overly effective builds. It is also about disallowing dubious overly costed builds. Buying Regeneration per hour, rather than per day, is not a dubious overly effective build, while spending 96 points to get the same result is a dubious overly costed build.

 

I was wondering about that. It's not entirely counterintuitive' date=' not as bad as having to buy running up from 0 even though everyone moves six. But it's not quite as elegant as simply buying up from the REC/month you start with.[/quote']

 

One further question. REC per month is unassisted healing. IIRC, good medical care and bed rest drops this to REC per week. Does that mean, under your model, a character who Regenerates every day can regenerate every 5 hours in hospital? It seems like your system makes medical care/rest a free adder of 5 points regen.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

Since I've been defending it, I might as well dig it up. This was the Regen variant I used back in the day. Old-timers might remember seeing it.

 

 

Regeneration:

 

This special power allows a character to recover BOD more

rapidly. Normally, BOD heals at a rate of 1 per point of

Recovery each month. Each 5 pts of Regeneration moves that

recovery rate one step up on the time chart - up to 35 pts which

allows the character to heal his REC in BOD each turn (on post-

segment-12). For 45 pts, the character can heal BOD every time

he takes a recovery (including post-segment-12). Characters

wishing to recover from wounds even faster should consider taking

Damage Reduction with the special effect of instantly healing.

 

Regeneration can go beyond merely speeding healing. For +10

pts the character's rate of Regeneration is unaffected by

environmental factors or levels of exertion. For +15 pts, he

does not 'bleed' (doesn't lose BOD after being reduced to 0 BOD or

suffer from the effects of the optional bleeding rules). The

character can also regrow lost limbs and recover completely from

the effects of Disabling wounds for +10 pts.

Regeneration cost: 5pts per step on the time chart. Heal

BOD on each Recovery for 45pts. Ignore environment/exertion

for +10 pts. Does not bleed +15pts. Regrow limbs +10.

Minimum cost 10pts.

 

As you can see, nothing explicit about pro-rating. IIRC, I was generally OK with pro-rating, though. By my standards this was really a pretty straightforward variant. I tend to get overly wordy and detailed. I believe the add-ons were prettymuch lifted from the 4e Automaton rules.

 

 

The problem here, if there is a problem is that, once you have bought some regeneration it makes senses to also buy more REC as it is so much more useful (up to a point - eventually you'll have too much to ever effectively use). In addition it means that if you DO have 20 REC, it is problematic to buy (say) 2 regeneration per turn. Finally the OP problem that you get returns out of proportion to your increasing spend is not solved: each step on the time chart is about a x5 increse in utility but the more you spend the less the next step costs proportionally. To be honest I'm not sure that is much of an objection because I'm not entirely sure there is any way around it, if we are to keep the time chart, which is dear to many hearts.

 

Still I like the concept and execution: it makes the sort of regeneration that can replace resistant defences a practical reality at a realistic cost: 45 points would get you 30 points of resistant defence, which is darned close to 'never takes Body' in many games, so being able to regenerate 10 or more Body in a turn would have a similar practical effect. Well...no quite - it still lags (even 20 Body per turn is not going to cope with getting hit twice or thrice by a 4d6 KA in a turn, but 15 rDEF (probably) would). Much closer though than what we have at present: regeneration is prohibitively expensive if you want to buy enough to not need resistant defence.

[Opal]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

Your approach makes a shift to' date=' say, per 5 minutes cost 30 points.[/quote']25pt with the 4e time chart, IIRC, but, yes. Healing as much in 5 minutes as a normal human might in a month is worth a few points.

 

Yup. And in your example point values, the characters paid to have a high REC for END and STUN.

I suppose I should repeat myself, again, and point out that REC already determinse how much body you heal. If you make a large investment in REC, most of the practical utility is for END and STN, but you /are/ paying for and getting faster healing, too.

 

So how much would we charge a character who wants more REC that only recovers BOD?

That's a little convoluted. It's up to the GM what to give for such a severe limitation - whatever was settled upon, it'd be less efficient than simply buying regeneration and regular REC.

 

The above simply indicates your system creates different cost irregularities, rather than eliminating cost irregularities. And I remain of the view that paying 96 points to recover 24 BOD per day is not indicative of a costing issue, but of a poor understanding of the rules.

I think I'm starting to see your point of view. If something printed in a rule book, you like it. If something's a variant, you hate it.

 

That's the only thing that makes sense, becaue your arguments sure don't. You're OK with a straightforward buy of a power costing 96 points, and another equally straightforward buy that nets the same thing costing 8, but you consider placing a hypothetical hinky limitation on REC to be indicitive of a 'cost irregularity.'

 

 

 

Let's say, under your model, I have a 7 REC, and I want to regenerate 24 BOD per day.

Why? Why does it have to be 24, exactly? You have a simple, intuitive power that lets you heal faster, buy it until you're happy with the amount you're recovering. If it's a little too much, you /might/ talk the GM into giving a small, partial, limitation on your REC. So, you could do 15 Regen for /5hrs, and limit 2 of your REC (save 0-1 point), so you regenerate 5/5hrs, which pro-rates to 1/hr or 24/day, or you could go to per hour for 20 points, limit 6 of your rec (save 2), and get something similar, or you could get really wierd, and buy +17 REC with a -4 limitation (yeah, right) 34/5 = 7 and 10 points of Regen. That 14, 18 or 17 points, all for about the same thing. Given how questionable the limitations are, that's really not too irregular. It's certainly orders of magnitude better than 96 vs 8. We're talking a variation of ~35% vs one of 1200%.

 

 

 

How do I do that? Buy +17 REC that only heals BOD (presumably very cheap, since the vast majority of REC's value is in the ability to recover STUN and END, as your reluctance to allow even a -1/4 limitation when those abilities remain makes clear)

Very small and very large 'limitted power' limitations are innately problematic. Like I said, I'd allow one if it was campagin apropriate, but it's going to be weird. I don't feel a need to go into detail explaining this, you get into it yourself:

 

The meta rule actually says that, if selecting between two equally valid builds, the more expensive one should be selected. It does not say to compare a straightforward build to a convoluted and irrational build. We buy, for example, a Mental Blast, not a Blast, AVAD Mental Defense, AVACV mOCV vs mDCV. IPE, LoS Range Modifier, only works against one class of minds. And we don't build it as Transform - target to target who has just lost xd6 of STUN vs Mental Defense, AVACV mOCV vs mDCV. IPE, LoS Range Modifier. There is no requirement to seek out means of increasing the cost.

REC 'only to recover BOD' is a pretty irrational build. It's a limitation that's so extreme it can't really be pegged accurately (after -2 limitations become iffy), like buying a 20d EB with a limitation that it does a maximum of 20 STN.

 

OTOH, just plugging numbers into the cost of a power is hardly irrational or extreme, it's just how you buy the power.

 

 

 

One further question. REC per month is unassisted healing. IIRC, good medical care and bed rest drops this to REC per week. Does that mean, under your model, a character who Regenerates every day can regenerate every 5 hours in hospital? It seems like your system makes medical care/rest a free adder of 5 points regen.

In 4e, 'bad conditions' slowed your healing and good ones, like hospitalization speeded it up (I can't recall if it actually shifted you up or down the chart, though, I don't think it did, I think it was just a halving or doubling). There's an adder in the Regen power I used that eliminates the effect of environmental conditions. So, yes, if you have regeneration that slows down when you're marching through a disease-infested swamp instead of resting, it'll also be faster if you're convalescing in a hospital.

[Opal]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

Thanks, Sean, for a much more reasoned critique...

 

The problem here' date=' if there is a problem is that, once you have bought some regeneration it makes senses to also buy more REC as it is so much more useful (up to a point - eventually you'll have too much to ever effectively use).[/quote']I think this is self-limitting. If you want to regenerate faster, buying more regeneration is almost always better than buying more REC.

 

In addition it means that if you DO have 20 REC, it is problematic to buy (say) 2 regeneration per turn.

Yeah, it's a granularity issue. The 4e time chart took big, ~x5 leaps. It works great for most things, since once you get beyond a turn, the doubling guideline that works so well for combat powers becomes onerous. But if you want an exact number, it becomes an issue. 20 Regen per minute nets the same as 4/turn, which is pretty close - and you don't track it in combat. A very small limitation on REC for someone who really wants a specific number is workable, though. They end up wasting a few points, but if you have that exacting and arbitrary a design goal, getting away with only wasting a few points isn't bad at all.

 

Finally the OP problem that you get returns out of proportion to your increasing spend is not solved: each step on the time chart is about a x5 increse in utility but the more you spend the less the next step costs proportionally. To be honest I'm not sure that is much of an objection because I'm not entirely sure there is any way around it, if we are to keep the time chart, which is dear to many hearts.

I still think the OP's objection was to paying radically different points for the same net effect. You /can/ try to make that happen even with this form of Regen, but you have to get hinky with limitations on your REC, and you still can't break it nearly as badly.

 

Still I like the concept and execution: it makes the sort of regeneration that can replace resistant defences a practical reality at a realistic cost: 45 points would get you 30 points of resistant defence, which is darned close to 'never takes Body' in many games, so being able to regenerate 10 or more Body in a turn would have a similar practical effect. Well...no quite - it still lags (even 20 Body per turn is not going to cope with getting hit twice or thrice by a 4d6 KA in a turn, but 15 rDEF (probably) would). Much closer though than what we have at present: regeneration is prohibitively expensive if you want to buy enough to not need resistant defence.

That's one of the things I was going for. You do notice, though, that even so, I still recomended using a defense if you wanted to regenerate any faster. The advantage of regeneration over defense, of course, is that it works on everything. You never know what kind of odd DM-aproved AVLD or multiple-penetrating attack or just plain crazy-high damage roll might punch through your 'regeneration special effect' defense, and leave you healing for a long time. I think, ideally, you want to do both - have some defense with the F/X of 'regenerating almost instantly' and also have very good regeneration. The defense helps keep your regen from being overwhelmed by things like autofire attacks.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

I suppose I should repeat myself' date=' again, and point out that REC already determinse how much body you heal. If you make a large investment in REC, most of the practical utility is for END and STN, but [b']you /are/ paying for and getting faster healing[/b], too.

 

REC 'only to recover BOD' is a pretty irrational build. It's a limitation that's so extreme it can't really be pegged accurately (after -2 limitations become iffy), like buying a 20d EB with a limitation that it does a maximum of 20 STN.

 

Either I am paying something to recover BOD, and this is one of the functions of REC, or I am not. Which is it? To me, despite the fact that REC governs natural recovery of BOD, it is fairly uncommon, especially in games where powers such as Healing and Regen are available, for BOD to commonly be recovered in this manner. Practically, in such a game, either the time scale needs to be pretty lengthy or taking BOD has to be pretty rare. Either of these changes the economics of purchasing Regeneration pretty significantly.

 

That's a little convoluted. It's up to the GM what to give for such a severe limitation - whatever was settled upon' date=' it'd be less efficient than simply buying regeneration and regular REC.[/quote']

 

So I can buy the same ability two ways, one which is more efficient and one which is less efficient, under your model. I thought that was the problem your system was intended to eliminate. It brings its own new problems, so I would only consider it superior to the published approach if it also brings some clear advantage, greater than these new drawbacks. I don't see that clear advantage. Instead, I see characters forced to choose between very rapid regeneration (full recovery every turn, or at least every minute) with a significant cost, or slower regeneration that, by the rules, will not necessarily have any impact during combat. Per minute or per 5 minutes operate per phase only if the GM likes the pro rating rules - and then only if your recovery and regen combo supports it - how often does 17 REC per 5 minutes recover a BOD? Less than 4 but more than 3 per minute, not quite once per turn, etc. 25 REC/5 minutes pro rates neatly to 1 BOD per turn, so I'm forced to neat breakpoints. But maybe a 25 REC (with per 5 min Regen) or a 5 REC (so per minute will work) are not reasonable REC levels for STUN and BOD in the game. It's a pretty wide range after all.

 

I think I'm starting to see your point of view. If something printed in a rule book' date=' you like it. If something's a variant, you hate it. [/quote']

 

Similarly, I see your point - if you come up with a variant, it must be perfect, so all criticisms should be ignored.

 

That's the only thing that makes sense' date=' becaue your arguments sure don't. You're OK with a straightforward buy of a power costing 96 points, and another equally straightforward buy that nets the same thing costing 8, but you consider placing a hypothetical hinky limitation on REC to be indicitive of a 'cost irregularity.' [/quote']

 

I'm not OK with anyone paying 96 points for 24 BOD per day regeneration. The appropriate build is 1 BOD per hour regeneration for 8 points. There is absolutely nothing wrong with selecting the straightforward build which accomplishes the desired objective. To me, at least, this is superior to forcing fixed costs for variable amounts of Regen (based on REC, which will vary between characters and between games) or requiring special cutoffs of REC to achieve the desired regen results. I find the result at the more rapid regen levels ridiculous - some Supers have REC that's more than double their BOD. Where is the utility for them recovering all their BOD every turn? Your system provides at best a negligible cost break, possibly none, for reducing the BOD recovered every turn. Maybe the player and the GM want regeneration rapid enough to happen in combat, but not so rapid as to render BOD damage either immediately fatal or immediately recoverable.

 

The ability to double the speed of Regeneration with experience is either pretty much lost under your model. I'd have to double my REC, also doubled for STUN and END, which is unlikely to be acceptable in most games, or pay for almost the same and only get the Regen aspect. Or I pay next to nothing for "REC - BOD only". Or I buy one step down the time chart, which quintuples my healing rate, likely for a much lower cost.

 

Why? Why does it have to be 24' date=' exactly? You have a simple, intuitive power that lets you heal faster, buy it until you're happy with the amount you're recovering. If it's a little too much, you /might/ talk the GM into giving a small, partial, limitation on your REC. So, you could do 15 Regen for /5hrs, and limit 2 of your REC (save 0-1 point), so you regenerate 5/5hrs, which pro-rates to 1/hr or 24/day, or you could go to per hour for 20 points, limit 6 of your rec (save 2), and get something similar, or you could get really wierd, and buy +17 REC with a -4 limitation (yeah, right) 34/5 = 7 and 10 points of Regen. That 14, 18 or 17 points, all for about the same thing. Given how questionable the limitations are, that's really not too irregular. It's certainly orders of magnitude better than 96 vs 8. We're talking a variation of ~35% vs one of 1200%.[/quote']

 

Why? So it's one per hour and the GM is not faced with the choice of tracking time in 17ths of a day or having all regen happen at the stroke of midnight. Not as big an isue when we're talking about 17 per day, but 17 per minute, or even 5 minutes, should have some impact in a combat situation. But it likely won't, since it's too much hassle tracking it through (what phase on Turn 3 do I recover a BOD again? Is this Turn 2 or Turn 3?)

 

Very small and very large 'limitted power' limitations are innately problematic. Like I said' date=' I'd allow one if it was campagin apropriate, but [b']it's going to be weird[/b]. I don't feel a need to go into detail explaining this, you get into it yourself.

 

My preference is for variants to reduce, not create or enhance, weird results.

 

I still think the OP's objection was to paying radically different points for the same net effect. You /can/ try to make that happen even with this form of Regen' date=' but you have to get hinky with limitations on your REC, and you still can't break it nearly as badly.[/quote']

 

You only get that result under the current model if you get hinky with your approach. Paying for 24 BOD per day rather than 1 per hour is a failure to read the actual power. It's no different from, under your model, having a 24 REC and buying Regen per hour, then limiting 23 of your REC so you only recover one per hour. It gets the same result, but the logical approach is simply to buy Regen per day and pro rate it over the hours. Just like the logical approach under the rules as written is to buy 1 Rgen per hour, not 24 per day and hope for pro rating.

[Opal]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

Either I am paying something to recover BOD' date=' and this is one of the functions of REC, or I am not. Which is it? To me, despite the fact that REC governs natural recovery of BOD, it is fairly uncommon[/quote']There are a lot of campaigns where BOD damage isn't exactly common, and if anyone does get injured, no one bothers to calculate exactly how long it takes them to recover. REC /does/ represent your ability to heal naturally, though, and it's an ability that's logically linked to how well you recover from other forms of damage and exhaustion, as well, so it's perfectly reasonable (and even retained in 6th after the whole stat-re-vamp thing). It's a very small part of the utility the score provides, which makes trying to buy just that function problematic, especially in such a campaign. Of course, there's not much call for regeneration is BOD damage is rarely an issue.

 

So I can buy the same ability two ways, one which is more efficient and one which is less efficient, under your model. I thought that was the problem your system was intended to eliminate.

You can always do that in a game like Hero, if you try hard enough. Sure, you can take a hinky limitation on REC to achieve some arbitrary design goal and end up wasting a handful of points. That's fairly minor, and it's not an obvious way to use the power.

 

There have been some other instances of breaking out a limitted function of a characteristic - Lightning Reflex & DEX, for instance. They're necessarily inefficient. If you were to try to get the same CV, initiative order, and SPD by buying OCV levels, DCV levels, Lightning Reflexes and SPD in 4e, you'd end up spending more than you would for DEX. The other options just allow some fine-tuning, if you really want it, but they're not meant to provide alternate ways to buy something that can already be gotten in a straightforward way.

 

Similarly, I see your point - if you come up with a variant, it must be perfect, so all criticisms should be ignored.

I haven't been ignoring you, have I?

 

To me, at least, this is superior to forcing fixed costs for variable amounts of Regen (based on REC, which will vary between characters and between games) or requiring special cutoffs of REC to achieve the desired regen results. I find the result at the more rapid regen levels ridiculous - some Supers have REC that's more than double their BOD. Where is the utility for them recovering all their BOD every turn?

There's nothing variable about what you pay for - you pay for the interval with Regeneration, and for the amount per interval with REC. REC is just a figured stat with a bundle of functionality of it's own that makes buying it /just/ to regenerate faster an inobvious and sub-optimal choice (though one that'll make you recover STN & END faster, too, so at least it's not wasted points). It's like buying SPD and Flight. You /can/ make your character go faster in MPH by taking more speed or by taking more flight. (And there have been turn-based movement schemes to 'fix' that anomally, in the past - I tried to come up with one myself: it sucked). SPD ultimately does a lot more than allow you get from A to B faster, though, so it's generally flight that you want.

 

As to the second point, yes, there is a degree of regeneration featured in some genres that makes /very/ fast regeneration desireable to model. Sean brought it up in his post, above.

 

I'm not OK with anyone paying 96 points for 24 BOD per day regeneration. The appropriate build is 1 BOD per hour regeneration for 8 points.

Then why is the 96 point build even on the table? And how is it 'getting what you pay for?'

 

6th made a lot of changes to the game to try to eliminate 'cost breaks' that might let an inexperienced player fall into an inefficient build, or a sophisticated player to finesse the system to save a few points. Characteristics were completely re-worked, a power framework eliminated, and so forth. Yet Regeneration lets you flush 88 points by taking an 'inapropriate' - but perfectly legal and intuitive - aproach to buying a power? It just doesn't jibe.

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

I don't remember anyone in this thread suggesting that the price for large amounts of BODY per regeneration made sense. However, I think they have all said that it's not really what the power is for. While it can sometimes be advantageous to get your BODY all at once, that effect should usually be modeled with the healing power.

[Vondy]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

I don't know if its been mentioned yet, but last night I noticed that the 6E rules (for healing) say if you want healing with the persistent advantage you should buy regeneration. That's a very significant difference and should rightly affect the cost differential.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

There are a lot of campaigns where BOD damage isn't exactly common' date=' and if anyone does get injured, no one bothers to calculate exactly how long it takes them to recover. REC /does/ represent your ability to heal naturally, though, and it's an ability that's logically linked to how well you recover from other forms of damage and exhaustion, as well, so it's perfectly reasonable (and even retained in 6th after the whole stat-re-vamp thing). It's a very small part of the utility the score provides, which makes trying to buy just that function problematic, especially in such a campaign. Of course, there's not much call for regeneration is BOD damage is rarely an issue.[/quote']

 

In such games, I often see Regen purchased by characters who don't fit the standard model. A Super game where the typical hero has 15 - 20 rDEF, for example, but this character relies on DCV, or damage reduction, or what have you, and will routinely take BOD, so he buys Regen to enable the character to survive. Certainly, the value of anny ability to heal BOD depends largely on how often BOD is taken. The value of combat abilities depends largely on how prevelant combat is, and the value of interaction skills depends largely on the extent to which interaction can resolve challenges in the game. The value of every ability depends on the context.

 

You can always do that in a game like Hero' date=' if you try hard enough. Sure, you can take a hinky limitation on REC to achieve some arbitrary design goal and end up wasting a handful of points. That's fairly minor, and it's not an obvious way to use the power.[/quote']

 

I would say buying 24 BOD per day regeneration rather than 1 BOD per hour regeneration is also not an obvious way to use the power. Have you ever seen a player with any experience, or a published character or sample power, use such an approach?

 

There have been some other instances of breaking out a limitted function of a characteristic - Lightning Reflex & DEX' date=' for instance. They're necessarily inefficient. If you were to try to get the same CV, initiative order, and SPD by buying OCV levels, DCV levels, Lightning Reflexes and SPD in 4e, you'd end up spending more than you would for DEX. The other options just allow some fine-tuning, if you really want it, but they're not meant to provide alternate ways to buy something that can already be gotten in a straightforward way.[/quote']

 

The excessive value of DEX compared to other approaches for buying the same results (or partial results) was an equallly, or even more, significant "figured characteristic" issue than STR or CON, in my opinion. Spending 25 points for 5 OCV levels, 25 more 5 DCV level and 15 for SPD instead of spending 45 for +15 DEX and getting lightning reflexes along with your 20 point savings was clearly counterproductive. RESULT: regardless of concept, pretty much everyone bought a high DEX. "highly skilled normals" didn't buy skill levels, they bought DEX. Or they got to be penalized for their concept.

 

6e has gone a way to correcting the problem, although I would suggest DEX is now overpriced compared to, say, INT or PRE.

 

It is not "necessary" that it be hugely inefficient to purchase the component parts of an ability. In fact, if the points are truly balanced, the result should be the ability to buy the components of an ability without a significant cost difference.

 

Is it possible to use the current Regen structure inappropriately and get a vastly inefficient construct? Yes. But your approach can also be used to get an inefficient construct. The current model is easily used to get regeneration with a more appropriate cost.

 

I haven't been ignoring you' date=' have I? [/quote']

 

A poor choice of words on my part, perhaps. "Dismissed" would be more appropriate than "ignored".

 

There's nothing variable about what you pay for - you pay for the interval with Regeneration' date=' and for the amount per interval with REC. REC is just a figured stat with a bundle of functionality of it's own that makes buying it /just/ to regenerate faster an inobvious and sub-optimal choice (though one that'll make you recover STN & END faster, too, so at least it's not wasted points).[/quote']

 

You still haven't answered the basic question of the character who wants to buy REC that only speeds recovery of Bod. Maybe he is playing a "people with powers" game. The GM will not allow a REC above 8 unless it is part of the character's "special power". This character's special power is rapid healing, not rapid recovery from exhaustion, so no extra REC. He does not want to recover 8 BOD per turn - this is excessive in game. He wants to recover 1 BOD per turn. This is what he and the GM consider appropriate. How does he model this in your system? What is the cost compared to recovering 8 BOD per turn? Clearly it should be lower. How much lower is a matter of perspective.

 

It's like buying SPD and Flight. You /can/ make your character go faster in MPH by taking more speed or by taking more flight. (And there have been turn-based movement schemes to 'fix' that anomally' date=' in the past - I tried to come up with one myself: it sucked). SPD ultimately does a lot more than allow you get from A to B faster, though, so it's generally flight that you want.[/quote']

 

It seems to me more like choosing between noncombat multiples or Megascale for your flight. If I want to travel at extreme speeds, I don't buy up my base flight speed to 250 meters for 250 points.

 

Then why is the 96 point build even on the table? And how is it 'getting what you pay for?'

 

To answer both, it's not. It is poor character design. Just like, in your system, it would be poor character design to buy Regeneration to a per day level, then buy extra REC for BOD only to bring your total 1,440 so you could regenerate 1 BOD per minute.

 

6th made a lot of changes to the game to try to eliminate 'cost breaks' that might let an inexperienced player fall into an inefficient build' date=' or a sophisticated player to finesse the system to save a few points. Characteristics were completely re-worked, a power framework eliminated, and so forth. Yet Regeneration lets you flush 88 points by taking an 'inapropriate' - but perfectly legal and intuitive - aproach to buying a power? It just doesn't jibe.[/quote']

 

How many points does my construct using your model flush? I don't think either one is any less obviously inappropriate. If you want to regenerate 1 BOD per hour, you buy 1 BOD per hour regeneration. Pretty simple. And if you want to fly 25 meters per phase, you buy 25 meters of Flight, not ExtraDimensional Movement, Usable as an attack, Megascale enough to cover the galaxy, to a dimension where I am in a location up to 25 meters distant from where I was before.

[Opal]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

I would say buying 24 BOD per day regeneration rather than 1 BOD per hour regeneration is also not an obvious way to use the power. Have you ever seen a player with any experience' date=' or a published character or sample power, use such an approach?[/quote']Well, it occurred to the OP. I have seen it come up with the older versions of Regen. A player would buy some Regen, limit it, and eventually realize it didn't make any sense to buy more than the minimum cost before aplying the limitation. The limitation wasn't part of the power, initially, though, so it wasn't like there was an obvious way (and there are still those who insist the most expensive way to buy a power is the 'right' way).

 

Obviously I haven't seen anyone do it 6th, since I don't play 6th...

 

Is it possible to use the current Regen structure inappropriately and get a vastly inefficient construct? Yes. But your approach can also be used to get an inefficient construct.

Sure - but the degree is orders of magnitude worse with the current system.

 

 

The excessive value of DEX compared to other approaches for buying the same results (or partial results) was an equallly, or even more, significant "figured characteristic" issue than STR or CON, in my opinion.

I saw you posting about that on another thread, yes. I guess that makes it a bad example for you. But, at least I have better insight into what your issue with this whole thing is....

 

It is not "necessary" that it be hugely inefficient to purchase the component parts of an ability. In fact, if the points are truly balanced, the result should be the ability to buy the components of an ability without a significant cost difference.

I think this is the crux of the issue, for you. There's a rationale for it - a very strong one IMHO - but I think it would be more helpful to you, the OP, and to making my original point, if we don't worry about it, and just work from your prefference.

 

 

I'm much more comfortable with 4th than with 5th, and have hardly looked at 6th beyond a very high-level view of 'what's changed,' so I can't suggest definitve point values, but here's a take on the interval-based aproach that might illustrate the value of it without getting tied up in other issues.

 

A normal character recovers 4 BOD/month based on the sarting value of REC. Let's decouple that from REC, entirely. Also, let's pro-rate it. Now, the base healing rate is 1 BOD/week. Nothing's really changed, we've just made healing BOD separate from REC, much like REC was made sepparate from STR & CON in 6th.

 

Now, for characters who want to heal faster than that, we'll have a power called Regeneration. It increases the speed at which you heal. Depending on what seems reasonable to you, it can use classic Hero doubling, or it can use the Time Chart. (I'm going to dismiss a linear model, where you just go from 1/wk to 2/wk, etc untill you get to however many thousands per week would be 'fast' regeneration). I'm not going to worry about the cost, either. The point is, you pay some points, and you go from healing 1/week to 1/day to 1/hr to 1/minute. Presumably, you could pay a fraction of the usual incremental cost to get something odd (like buying a half-die vs a die-minus-one) if you want greater granularity. Eventually, you get down to 1/turn, which seems about as fast as is workable (I like 1/recovery action, but that might bring SPD into it, so let's not go there). From there, you can continue to buy regeneration, you just recover more each turn. Probably a point at a time, since it's now meanigful in combat.

 

The advantages of this aproach are:

 

It's fully isolated from other powers and stats (an 'atomic' power, as we used to say).

There's only one way to buy a given level of regeneration.

The cost is based on the more important interval.

You have granularity at the high end, once you're regenerating 1/turn.

The issue of pro-rating never even comes up.

 

Sound good?

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

The fact that someone found the most expensive, least efficient way to do something does not always indicate a flaw in the system. It's called User Error.

[Bodkins Odds]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

The fact that someone found the most expensive' date=' least efficient way to do something does not always indicate a flaw in the system. It's called User Error.[/quote']

 

The fact that it's such an easy mistake to make is a problem with the system though. It guarantees that the mistake will be made, made often, and made at the worst possible time.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

A normal character recovers 4 BOD/month based on the sarting value of REC. Let's decouple that from REC, entirely. Also, let's pro-rate it. Now, the base healing rate is 1 BOD/week. Nothing's really changed, we've just made healing BOD separate from REC, much like REC was made sepparate from STR & CON in 6th.

 

Now, for characters who want to heal faster than that, we'll have a power called Regeneration. It increases the speed at which you heal. Depending on what seems reasonable to you, it can use classic Hero doubling, or it can use the Time Chart. (I'm going to dismiss a linear model, where you just go from 1/wk to 2/wk, etc untill you get to however many thousands per week would be 'fast' regeneration). I'm not going to worry about the cost, either. The point is, you pay some points, and you go from healing 1/week to 1/day to 1/hr to 1/minute. Presumably, you could pay a fraction of the usual incremental cost to get something odd (like buying a half-die vs a die-minus-one) if you want greater granularity. Eventually, you get down to 1/turn, which seems about as fast as is workable (I like 1/recovery action, but that might bring SPD into it, so let's not go there). From there, you can continue to buy regeneration, you just recover more each turn. Probably a point at a time, since it's now meanigful in combat.

 

The advantages of this aproach are:

 

It's fully isolated from other powers and stats (an 'atomic' power, as we used to say).

There's only one way to buy a given level of regeneration.

The cost is based on the more important interval.

You have granularity at the high end, once you're regenerating 1/turn.

The issue of pro-rating never even comes up.

 

Sound good?

 

With the exception of removing the link between REC and healing of BOD, it is effectively similar to the 6e model. Under that model, healing 1 BOD per week costs 2 points. Each step up the time chart increases the cost by 2. Each additional BOD healed requires you pay the cost again. If one simply removes the ability to purchase more than 1 BOD per time interval (which causes the potential costing problem if someone buys 24 BOD per day instead of 1 BOD per hour), they get your system (although you might apply different costs). So your approach simply removes a level of granularity which, practically, would only be efficient at the most rapid Regen rate allowed in the game (no point buying 2 BOD per hour if I can buy 1 BOD every 20 minutes).

[Phil]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

It strikes me this thread has got very heated and I'm not really sure why. The issue, going back to the top, is apurely mechanical one based on an arithmetical BOD progression and a non-linear time progression. to resolve the difficulty, simply remove one of these two mechanisms. And I'm definitely not a fan of linking regeneration to REC purely and simply because it goes against 6th edition's separation of figured characteristics - I'd like to be able to build low Regen, high REC; high Regen, low REC and any variant inbetween.

 

My suggestion: build Regen as +1 REC (Limited: Purely for purposes of Recovering BOD). Build REC up enough and it becomes +1 per day, then +1 per hour.

 

Neat. Consistent. Tidy. Does it make Regen a lot more expensive? Probably, but on the basis of the current heal rate it probably should be. An alternative, of course, as mentioned previously is to compare it to use of Heal. Or indeed Aid. Though I fear that this will just highlight more odd cost behaviours in some of the powers.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

Assuming Regeneration is viewed as changing the interval between BOD recoveries for REC, I think Regen simply becomes an advantage on REC.

 

In fact, 6e Regen can reasonably be considered priced as a naked advantage on REC, being +2 for each step up the time chart. You can buy "BOD recovers per turn" as a +16 advantage (16 points for 1 point of REC) or "BOD recovers per day" as a +8 advantage (8 points for 1 REC).

[Opal]

Re: Regeneration Costs

 

My suggestion: build Regen as +1 REC (Limited: Purely for purposes of Recovering BOD). Build REC up enough and it becomes +1 per day, then +1 per hour.

 

Neat. Consistent. Tidy. Does it make Regen a lot more expensive? Probably, but on the basis of the current heal rate it probably should be.

Probably too expensive. it depends on what you peg the limitation at, but, unless it's a truely unprecedented limitation, being able to regenerate 1/BOD per turn in combat would pretty expensive, at 216,000 REC...

 

Similarly, an advantage to REC runs into the same problems as the old versions of Regen, and the current: that it can cost you a lot more to regenerate a lot of BOD, infrequently, than the same amount spread out over more frequent intervals.