WHY CSL's

[JmOz]

Why would you use CSL's in a 6th edition Champions Game?

[BNakagawa]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

Because sometimes you're more accurate doing this rather than that.

 

more elaborately, you could be more accurate with punching rather than shooting people. or vice versa.

[Asperion]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

This is the way that I see the difference between CV and CSL:

 

CV - the natural ability that most people possess and can use at all times and conditions (unless the GM states otherwise).

CSL - the refined training that the individual has received through years of practice (either through actual combat or danger room combat)

 

As a result, any beginner will be able to use upto his full CV, but only after years of training will the levels of CSLs appear that are normally seen on the character sheet.

[ghost-angel]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

Besides Concept?

 

Options.

 

Adding damage is nice. We use it all the time in our Champions games. Only reason we ever managed to even start causing Stun to Dr. Destroyer was a coordinated effort of knocking him prone (one person dropped their CSLs in to OCV) and then the rest of us putting on a beat down (we all put our CSLs into getting a few extra Damage Classes and performed a Coordinated Attack). Worked rather nice to have all those options on the table.

[JmOz]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

Let me state my question differently: assumeing a game not using NCM, are CSL's appropriatly priced when compared to strait power/characteristics increases? Why or Why not? Note that concept is not a good answer to me, at least by itself. In theroy the points should balance each other out.

[ghost-angel]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

See: Half Dozen Previous Conversation On Topic; there are many.

 

I say yes, they are. The ability to switch between three different options is appropriately priced IMO.

[JmOz]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

To expand, a single CSL for all attacks is +10 points, Usable for three things (+1 OCV OR DCV OR 1/2 DC). or I could spend the same 10 points and be +1 OCV and +1 DCV vs all attacks. Admitingly I would loose the option of a .5 DC, but have 2 persistent or be able to choose 1 at a time, it seems unbalanced to me

[JmOz]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

Last post was posted while G-A was posting

 

I have read some of the other threads, but at the core of the Pro balanced arguments I have seen is when NCM gets involved it balances, I am wondering in a game where there is no NCM does the balance really hold.

 

Damage is an interesting bit in the discusion IMO, as when you get more attacks it becomes cheaper to add with CSLs, unless all of those attacks are in a MP, these are the things i want to hear opinions on.

 

I do thank G-A for his opinons on this, as he is one of the best board mates there can be

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

I'm on the other side - I think they are overpriced, at least somewhat. As you note, you could have +1 OCV and +1 DCV for 10 points. The ability to trade off is cheaper in a Multipower.

 

For 12 points, you could have a Multipower of +2 DCV and +2 OCV, so for 2 more points and sacrificing the ability to add DC's, you double the bonus from your levels.

 

I agree the problem for these and non-combat skill levels was always that appropriate Supers pricing meant discount NCM pricing. But NCM is no longer part of the core rules, so why are levels priced to work better in a game that uses an optional rule than in one that follows the basic rules of Hero? if apropriately priced skill levels would be too cheap using optional NCM runes, enhance the optional NCM rules to bump the cost of skill levels in NCM games.

 

I think 8 points for all combat is probably reasonable - that's a 3 slot flexible multipower with a 5 point pool. Is that a huge difference from the current 10 point cost? Well, it's "only" 2 points. But then, it's a 25% increase, and that seems pretty substantial.

 

Maybe we need the ability to spend 10 points to add +1 0 END DC to all attacks. With a -1 limitation, that's 5 points for +1 DC with all HTH attacks (works poorly because STR is 5 points, but then it should also add to martial maneuvers that STR would not normally add to, shouldn't it?) or -1 1/2 if you restrict it to Martial Arts attacks (10/2.5 = 4 points). If you restrict it to Ranged attacks, that would also be -1, so 5 points.

 

If we adopted this base ability, then the pricing of skill levels would seem to fall into line.

 

You would get a cost break since that overall CSL could add OECV or ODCV, of course. But that is only really advantageous if the character has a suite of mental and physical attacks - how many do?

[torchwolf]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

OTOH, CVs can now be affected by Adjustment Powers, while CSLs can not.

[dmjalund]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

OTOH' date=' CVs can now be affected by Adjustment Powers, while CSLs can not.[/quote']the equivalent of the Inherent advantage (+1/4)

[The Main Man]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

the equivalent of the Inherent advantage (+1/4)

 

I was going to mention the whole adjustment thing but you raise a good point there.

 

The exception would be if the CSL's are purchased as powers.

[JmOz]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

OTOH' date=' CVs can now be affected by Adjustment Powers, while CSLs can not.[/quote']

 

Our you sure? Admitingly a drain skill is rare, but I can't remember seeing anything that specificaly forbids it (But I can't ever remember seeing one either)

[Escafarc]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

Our you sure? Admitingly a drain skill is rare' date=' but I can't remember seeing anything that specificaly forbids it (But I can't ever remember seeing one either)[/quote']

In the section about Adjustment Powers(6E1 pg135) it only say Powers and/or Characteristics so I guess Skills bought as a Power could be affected.

[JmOz]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

good to know, and definitly a factor, but just as Unified effect may be to much of a limitation, Inherent is to expensive as an advantage (In my experience based on how often Drains come up)

[Ice9]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

I think that some CSLs are overpriced (the 8 and 10 point ones), but the large and small group CSLs are reasonably priced and a viable trade-off between reliability and versatility. The 2-point CSLs are fine as well, but I'm not really sure how those are different than just limited OCV.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

If I have a 3 DCV and 5 levels, and I get drained 15 points, I still have a 5 DCV, just like the guy with an 8 DCV and no levels.

 

I forget how negatives work now, but I would be inclined to rule you need to offset the negatives with positives to get your DCV back up above 0 again, but that's my own bias, not a rule as far as I am aware. With 6e eliminating drains into the negative, this is likely more me ruling them back in.

 

But why should skill cap someone's ability to drain your CV? The SlowDown Ray reduces Flash and Nightcrawler to 0 DCV, but Punisher can still bump his to 6 with skill levels?

[Alverant]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

One advantage to CSL is that it's easier to justify limitations on them to make it cheaper. If you're going to apply a limitation on the CV stats (like a focus) it's harder to justify; you're usually left with a suit of armor or a magic maguffin amulet. CSLs with a focus limitation can be weapon sites, a higher quality weapon, etc. More importantly as a CSL focus you can toss the focus to someone else who needs it (usually done in Heroic level campaigns).

[The Main Man]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

If I have a 3 DCV and 5 levels, and I get drained 15 points, I still have a 5 DCV, just like the guy with an 8 DCV and no levels.

 

I forget how negatives work now, but I would be inclined to rule you need to offset the negatives with positives to get your DCV back up above 0 again, but that's my own bias, not a rule as far as I am aware. With 6e eliminating drains into the negative, this is likely more me ruling them back in.

 

But why should skill cap someone's ability to drain your CV? The SlowDown Ray reduces Flash and Nightcrawler to 0 DCV, but Punisher can still bump his to 6 with skill levels?

 

Actually, Draining DCV 15 points would only lower it by 1 because of the halving effect, but your point still stands.

 

You make an interesting observation about negative OCV/DCV and the application of CSLs... I would like to point out just how much quicker CSL's are for instantly remedying the situation in the short term than Healing is.

[JmOz]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

One advantage to CSL is that it's easier to justify limitations on them to make it cheaper. If you're going to apply a limitation on the CV stats (like a focus) it's harder to justify; you're usually left with a suit of armor or a magic maguffin amulet. CSLs with a focus limitation can be weapon sites' date=' a higher quality weapon, etc. More importantly as a CSL focus you can toss the focus to someone else who needs it (usually done in Heroic level campaigns).[/quote']

 

I don't know if I agree that because you could justify it easier it is worth an advantage. IMO that is because there is a kind of default F/X we apply to it that might not be appropriate

 

(All caps is being used to distinguish game elements)

If I had a metamorph who could stick his finger into a lock and unlock it I would say that the best way to build it is as a high level of Lockpicking, this is a power built from a SKILL, or if I am building a batman clone I might build him with Teleportaion, a POWER that is on the character a skill.

 

The mechanic should be pointed to be fair. I am getting the feeling that the best way to handle this is to actualy treet CSL as being something NCM modifies in cost...

[ajackson]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

I had a thread about CSL costs; short version is that 8 and 10 point levels appear overpriced (the 'proper' cost appears to be 8 for all combat), 5 point levels are probably slightly underpriced, 3 point levels are almost certainly underpriced.

[Haerandir]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

Don't forget Bouncing an Attack!

 

Hey, it's *A* reason to buy CSLs.

 

As far as the relative point costs of CSLs vs. OCV/DCV... At the very basic level, point-for-point, you're almost always going to be better off with some combination of CV and DCs. At least in comparison with CSLs with All Combat. That's just the way the cookie crumbles. That doesn't mean that CSLs are never a good buy. There are several issues at work:

 

1) All-Combat CSLs have to be more expensive than Hand-to-Hand or Ranged CSLs, and have to be cheaper than Overall Levels. That means that their actual price is effectively set for them by other abilities. The dirty little secret of All-Combat levels is that they've always been over-priced, and probably always will be, because the only way to price them 'fairly' would require them to be much too cheap in comparison to H-to-H/Ranged levels, or push Overall Levels up into the realm of 'too expensive to buy, period'.

 

2) The more things an ability does, the harder it is to price 'fairly'. This was the issue with STR and DEX in previous editions... If you wanted all of the things you could get by buying more DEX, it was insanely efficient at 3 CP/point. If you only wanted some of those things, it was about right. If you only wanted one those things, it would have been over-priced at 2 CP/point. All Combat Levels suffer from a milder form of this problem... Most characters don't really need to be 'specialized' in all forms of combat, so you really shouldn't be buying All-Combat levels without a very specific reason. If you want to be 'good at everything', Overall Levels aren't that much more expensive, and do a LOT more.

 

3) The Fifth Edition pricing structure wasn't broke, but they decided to fix it anyway. By simplifying the rules for adding damage (and allowing Ranged CSLs to be used for DCV), 5-point levels were noticeably better than they had been before, 'necessitating' an increase to 8-point levels for H-to-H/Ranged Combat, which pushed All-Combat levels to 10. Personally, I liked the old system better, but I can see why the change was made.

 

Now, as for why you would want All-Combat levels over more OCV/DCV... Well, the flexibility/added damage does help. The tipping point (for me) is the point at which buying more base CV starts giving you diminishing returns. If your base OCV/DCV is already above the average values for your campaign, buying another +1 gives you less benefit (in terms of hit percentage) than the points you've already bought. At that point, you're better off buying something that you can use to give you one of several bonuses, depending on the actual situation you're facing (i.e. bonus damage against most opponents, bonus OCV against speedsters and MAs, bonus DCV against opponents with high-damage or exotic attacks), instead of something that gives you a minor benefit all of the time. For example:

 

In a campaign where the average CV is, say, 8:

 

if your base OCV/DCV is 8, you will connect with your attacks, and be hit by opponents, rougly 62% of the time.

 

if your base OCV/DCV is 9, you will connect with your attacks 74% of the time, and you will be hit by the average opponent 50% of the time. 10 points = roughly 10% improvement. At this point, spending the same points on +1 with All Combat is clearly not a good plan (though 3-5 point levels are viable).

 

if your base OCV/DCV is 10, it will improve those percentages to 84%/38%. Which is impressive, but if you can hit 'more often than not' anyway, the option of converting two CSLs to an extra DC of damage is fairly attractive.

 

At higher values, the bonus CV becomes less and less effective in terms of generating additional hits (or misses), but extra damage is always handy. The percentages tail off quickly after 'average CV +2'. And if you're fighting opponents who are below average CV, they quickly become meaningless.

 

The other thing is that comparing '1 CSL' to '+1 CV' is always going to look bad for the CSLs, since so much of their actual utiiity is only expressed by having several of them. Honestly, if I buy them at all, I almost never buy fewer than 3 CSLs. That's a good amount, since it'll take your average 11- chance to hit up to 14-, or cancel out a Dodge, or give you +1 DC and still let you increase your CV a bit.

 

It ends up coming down to an intersection of character concept, campaign environment and play-style. For a fairly straight-forward brick or energy projector, straight OCV/DCV or cheap, restricted-purpose CSLs are a good choice. For a character who is already well above campaign-average in OCV/DCV (such as a speedster or MA), CSLs become increasingly attractive (and often tend to reinforce the character's concept). For a character who has below-average CVs and not a lot of points to spend on OCV/DCV, the flexibility of CSLs allows them to adapt their limited combat ability to their situation, giving them a puncher's chance to hit anyone, or a panic button for when they're in over their head, or the option of a death-or-glory gamble to drop the opponent quickly.

 

Plus, frankly, I find that CSLs generally lead to characters that are more fun to play. Cheap CSLs force you to define what your character is good at because they only apply to certain things. Plus, switching between OCV and DCV adds a level of tactical complexity and drama to combat that you lose by always having the same CV. In a sense, it's an illusory benefit, but all role-playing is an illusion, anyway, so what the heck.

[JmOz]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

Good post, but I will point out that Ranged CSL's always were able to be used with DCV, it was just a common option to not allow them, but RAW said you could (I had a couple of debates about that with one of my players, with him saying that you could not...)

[Gideon]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

This may sound like it isn't relevant, but I think it may be.

 

In the campaign I am currently in my GM has said that its worth a -1/4 limitation for a CSL to not add to one of the categories (OCV, DCV, or DC).

[The Main Man]

Re: WHY CSL's

 

Good post' date=' but I will point out that Ranged CSL's always were able to be used with DCV, it was just a common option to not allow them, but RAW said you could (I had a couple of debates about that with one of my players, with him saying that you could not...)[/quote']

I remember having such a debate here on the boards myself.