Should Speed have a scaling cost?

[bill4747bill]

Base speed 2, only costs 10 points for a 50% increase, 20 points and you have doubled your number of actions. Shouldn't the first few (especially) Speed increases cost more to buy?

 

It has always bothered me that Speed is dirt cheap to buy.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

In all reality, I think it should be the opposite, with higher speed increases costing more than the first few.

 

It tends to balance out fine in lower power level games, but in higher point games, it can get out of hand with the speedsters not really sacrificing much of their point value for a lot of gain (like, say, aborting to dodge on all the speed 3/4/5 phases then acting on all their additional phases...)

 

Luckily, I haven't had to deal with a speedster in a few years, they seem to be unpopular character types.

[Ternaugh]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

I tend to game in the Heroic side of things (FH mostly), so SPD isn't really a big worry for me. Most folks that the PCs encounter will be SPD 2 (everyday people, low level mooks). A few will be SPD 3 (Mages, most mooks), if they have some experience with combat. And the top challenges will be SPD 4. Most PCs end up as SPD 4 if they are primarily fighters, and SPD 3 for pretty much everyone else. I use the NCM rules, so once in a great while, I'll get someone who wants to pay the penalty for SPD 5. The downside to high speed is burning through END at incredible rates (especially for spellcasters in FH), so it tends to balance out.

 

JoeG

[bobooton]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

I just factor it into Rule of X. Cheap or expensive as it may be, what matters is how effective the character is in the game in question.

[dmjalund]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

One can consider than someone with a Spd of 8 has the same advantage (slightly less actually) over people with Spd 4, as people with Spd 4 have over Normals with Spd 2

 

(the slightly less, has to do with post-12 recovery)

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

The thing is, going from SPEED 2 to SPEED 3 is a 50% increase. Going from 3 to 4 is a 33% increase. Going from 4 to 5... The more SPEED you buy, the less you get for your 10 CP.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

While true, the amount of damage and effect you can pump out continues to grow linearly, so a linear cost seems appropriate to me.

 

Also, you could give the same argument for just about anything. +1DC doubles the effectiveness of an attack if it's starting at 1DC, but is only a 10% increase if the attack is starting at 10DC. So should the cost of a DC of damage decrease as the attack gets bigger?

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

While true, the amount of damage and effect you can pump out continues to grow linearly, so a linear cost seems appropriate to me.

 

Also, you could give the same argument for just about anything. +1DC doubles the effectiveness of an attack if it's starting at 1DC, but is only a 10% increase if the attack is starting at 10DC. So should the cost of a DC of damage decrease as the attack gets bigger?

Nope, because the in-game effectiveness tends to follow the opposite. Between in-game effectiveness being a positive curve and strict cost/"product" ratio being a negative curve - You get a rough average of a linear cost.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

Nope' date=' because the in-game effectiveness tends to follow the opposite. Between in-game effectiveness being a positive curve and strict cost/"product" ratio being a negative curve - You get a rough average of a linear cost. [/quote']

 

Actually, in a game where average defenses are, say, 12, moving from 1d6 to 2d6 has no real impact - you still can't get any damage through to an average target. 3d6 still requires an above average roll. But going from 6d6 to 7d6 means an extra 1d6 STUN gets past defenses, since 6d6 will almost certainly exceed the average target's defenses.

 

I don't think a scaling cost would be any more appropriate for Speed than any of the other linear costed abilities.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

Once you get past defences, however, there's a quick positive curve.

 

I didn't say that.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

Once you get past defences' date=' however, there's a quick positive curve.[/quote']

Once you get past defenses there's a very linear relationship between DCs and the amount of damage you do, actually. Just like if you can get past defenses there's a linear relationship between speed and the amount of damage you do.

 

(Very close, anyway. Especially once you get a few DCs over average damage being equal to defenses, so that the likelihood of not getting past defenses is low.)

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

You're not factoring in the "time till death". Going from 12d6 to 16d6 against 12 PD is a rather larger step than going from 8d6 to 12d6.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

You're not factoring in the "time till death". Going from 12d6 to 16d6 against 12 PD is a rather larger step than going from 8d6 to 12d6.

 

Yeah, but the (subtractive) difference between 12d6 and 16d6 is about the same as the difference between 16d6 and 20d6, or 20d6 and 24d6, or 24d6 and 28d6. Likewise, defenses have a linear cost and the size of defense an attack can get through is directly and linearly proportional to the number of dice. So yeah, linear.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

Yeah' date=' but the (subtractive) difference between 12d6 and 16d6 is about the same as the difference between 16d6 and 20d6, or 20d6 and 24d6, or 24d6 and 28d6. Likewise, defenses have a linear cost and the size of defense an attack can get through is directly and linearly proportional to the number of dice. So yeah, linear.[/quote']

Nope' date=' because the in-game effectiveness tends to follow the opposite. Between in-game effectiveness being a positive curve and strict cost/"product" ratio being a negative curve - You get a rough average of a linear cost. [/quote']

*Sigh*

[JPicasso]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

As with all things RPG, I think the GM has to have some reigns on spd.

 

I've played games where we set an active point limit to 300 per turn, so 5 spd heros get 60 AP to throw around, Bricky, 4 spd heros get 75, 6 get 50's. Works well for those three cases, it can really nerf a 7 or 8 speedster, but those should get GM permission anyways. It's a good guideline to keep people from trying to "cheat" the system.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

*Sigh*

 

We both may have reached the same conclusion, but through vastly different reasoning. I'm not saying that one's kinda positive and one's kinda negative, so it all balances out. I'm saying that the in-game effectiveness is very linear.

 

For example, take the Stun done by a Normal Damage attack. While the actual curve of average damage vs. number of dice may have a positive curvature near 3.5*x = D (where D is the amount of defense), it very quickly approaches 3.5*x-D which is a linear relationship in x. If you were to plot it, you'd easily see the asymptotically linear behavior.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

We both may have reached the same conclusion, but through vastly different reasoning. I'm not saying that one's kinda positive and one's kinda negative, so it all balances out. I'm saying that the in-game effectiveness is very linear.

 

For example, take the Stun done by a Normal Damage attack. While the actual curve of average damage vs. number of dice may have a positive curvature near 3.5*x = D (where D is the amount of defense), it very quickly approaches 3.5*x-D which is a linear relationship in x. If you were to plot it, you'd easily see the asymptotically linear behavior.

Yep. There's no practical way to plot out all these curves and come up with "exact costs". So linear.

[jtelson]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

As with all things RPG, I think the GM has to have some reigns on spd.

 

I've played games where we set an active point limit to 300 per turn, so 5 spd heros get 60 AP to throw around, Bricky, 4 spd heros get 75, 6 get 50's. Works well for those three cases, it can really nerf a 7 or 8 speedster, but those should get GM permission anyways. It's a good guideline to keep people from trying to "cheat" the system.

 

That's clever

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

As with all things RPG, I think the GM has to have some reigns on spd.

 

I've played games where we set an active point limit to 300 per turn, so 5 spd heros get 60 AP to throw around, Bricky, 4 spd heros get 75, 6 get 50's. Works well for those three cases, it can really nerf a 7 or 8 speedster, but those should get GM permission anyways. It's a good guideline to keep people from trying to "cheat" the system.

 

I don 't think any rule of thumb can be evaluated in isolation. Let's assume that the characters will hit with equal frequency, and that the only variable to assess is defenses of the opposition.

 

If the typical opponent has 20 defenses, an average normal attack will inflict 15 points STUN (50 AP), 22 STUN (60 AP) or 32.5 STUN (75 AP) so, from your limits, 90, 110 or 130 per turn. Advantage: Low SPD, high DC's.

 

What if the target averages 30 defenses? Now we're looking at average damage of 5 (30 per turn), 12 (60 per turn) or 22.5 (90 per turn).

 

Drop that average defense to 15 (pretty low for the DC's we're talking) and the average becomes 20 (120), 27 (135) and 37.5 (150). At 10 defenses, it's 25 (150), 32 (160) and 42.5 (170).

 

Of course, this assumes those extra phases get used only to attack, but then a DC limit only reduces the character's effectiveness in phases where he does attack. Those lower AP attacks may well take advantages to circumvent defenses, while Bricky characters generally only add more normal DC's. Drop to 3 SPD and 20d6, and you are likely the combat-ender with 120 STUN per turn against 30 defense targets.

[dmjalund]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

Maybe we should compare Spd with Autofire

[Ternaugh]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

I don 't think any rule of thumb can be evaluated in isolation. Let's assume that the characters will hit with equal frequency, and that the only variable to assess is defenses of the opposition.

 

If the typical opponent has 20 defenses, an average normal attack will inflict 15 points STUN (50 AP), 22 STUN (60 AP) or 32.5 STUN (75 AP) so, from your limits, 90, 110 or 130 per turn. Advantage: Low SPD, high DC's.

 

What if the target averages 30 defenses? Now we're looking at average damage of 5 (30 per turn), 12 (60 per turn) or 22.5 (90 per turn).

 

Drop that average defense to 15 (pretty low for the DC's we're talking) and the average becomes 20 (120), 27 (135) and 37.5 (150). At 10 defenses, it's 25 (150), 32 (160) and 42.5 (170).

 

Of course, this assumes those extra phases get used only to attack, but then a DC limit only reduces the character's effectiveness in phases where he does attack. Those lower AP attacks may well take advantages to circumvent defenses, while Bricky characters generally only add more normal DC's. Drop to 3 SPD and 20d6, and you are likely the combat-ender with 120 STUN per turn against 30 defense targets.

 

Good grief! I always glaze over a bit when these numbers get thrown around. As someone who plays primarily in a Heroic genre, I tend to not have many characters exceeding an average DEF of 6-8, with attacks averaging about 6DCs or so.

 

JoeG

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

Good grief! I always glaze over a bit when these numbers get thrown around. As someone who plays primarily in a Heroic genre' date=' I tend to not have many characters exceeding an average DEF of 6-8, with attacks averaging about 6DCs or so. [/quote']

 

I ran my numbers with the Supers example given. Modifying the logic, let's assume the DC x SPD allowed in a heroic game would be 18 (6 DC's at SPD 3, 4 1/2 DC's at SPD 4 or 9 DC's at SPD 2).

 

So that 8 DEF target takes an average of 13 STUN from a hit from a 3 SPD character (39 STUN per turn), 8 STUN from a hit from a 4 SPD character (32 STUN per turn) or 23.5 from a hit from a 2 SPD character (almost certainly Stunned, as well as 47 STUN per turn). The low SPD choice still wins.

[Fearghus]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

Base speed 2, only costs 10 points for a 50% increase, 20 points and you have doubled your number of actions. Shouldn't the first few (especially) Speed increases cost more to buy?

 

It has always bothered me that Speed is dirt cheap to buy.

 

I hear the voices of my players when I read this question. It also seems to me that it is the point of view of a min-max style of play.

 

With every point based game I have a player that says something to the effect of "It has always bothered me that Speed is dirt cheap to buy." Yes it is true. You are free to spend all your points on Speed, or OCV or DCV, or your Blast power or your Armor and you will be a one trick pony with one hell of an awesome trick. But... what is the point in acting 12 times if you don't have an attack power that can break through the defenses of your opponents, or if your OCV is so low you can't even hit them or your DCV is so low you ALWAYS get hit or your DEF is so low that one hit takes you out? The bottom line is that yes you are free to spend all your points on one thing and in that one thing... YOU ROCK. but you have still created a useless character. I have found time and time again. anyone that has min-maxed in this game quickly tires of his character and re-creates or quits the game. because in MY games. If you min-max... I WILL exploit your weakness. Maybe not in every session but it will happen. In the end all characters start with the same points, and NPCs will be built with somewhere around the same point level. So long as everyone is spending points using the same rules... all is fair.

[Edge]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

The thing is' date=' going from SPEED 2 to SPEED 3 is a 50% increase. Going from 3 to 4 is a 33% increase. Going from 4 to 5... The more SPEED you buy, the less you get for your 10 CP.[/quote']

 

I think there is a flaw in this logic.

 

If you spend 10 points to increase from 2 to 3 you increase your speed by 50%

If you spend 10 points to increase from 3 to 4 you increase your speed by 33%

 

But...

 

If you spend 20 points you increase your speed from 2 to 3 to 4 and that is a 100% increase.

 

What the?

 

The point is that you can say the same thing for each and every statistic that is related to combat and/or a skill.

 

But, if you look at it differently, and look at what you actually get, it remains the same as long as you avoid characteristic maxima.

 

If you increase your speed by 1, whether it is from 3 to 4 or from 5 to 6, you get one more chance to attack and move or one more recovery plus the chance to go before a creature with one less speed even if it has a higher dexterity.

 

You get the same regardless.

 

Note: I hope this was not a case of my sarcasm meter failing. Actually, the more I think about it...

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Should Speed have a scaling cost?

 

Percentages are weird. At least, when you try to add/subtract/multiply/divide them directly.