Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

[Kruhl Sentru]

I'm still very much new to the HERO System, and I made a 6E 500 point telekinetic/partially undead superhero. Later on, after having read some more, I pitted him against 5 200 point zombies. Needless to say, even in close quarters his ability to grab and throw zombies with telekinesis made the fight almost too easy.

 

However, I had wanted this character to represent himself as someone who constantly pushes themselves beyond normal limitations, and thus took the limitation Increased Endurance Cost on several of my powers. Then, I turned around and gave him a 200 endurance point pool and a recovery of 55 for the purposes of regaining endurance only (his recovery is 10 normally).

 

As a result, if it wasn't for his speed of 6 compared the zombie's speed of 2, he could have been in alot of trouble with the way he was built. Even his PD and ED require endurance to keep active, so taking recoveries when you can get hit sounds like a really bad idea. However, I frequently had to take recoveries in my little mock battle just to be able to do anything at all.

 

So, I was wondering, is there a better way I could have built this character to represent him pushing himself constantly? For that matter, is it ever a good idea to take a power with the limitation of increased endurance cost when you plan on using this power regularly?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

First, I highly recommend reading the rules for Pushing.

 

Adding the Increased END Limitation to otherwise 'standard' defenses is usually a bad idea.

I would recommend stating out the character's non 'pushed' abilities a little lower than the campaign norm (but still better than agents and zombies) and then build secondary abilities with Increased END (they can be stand alone or stack with base abilities).

 

I like building characters with lots of END management options (even if they don't actually use the Increased END Limitation)

My starting version of Superman has both low END (like Added STR and Def from Density) and several high END using powers to choose from. Sometimes the situations he face might force him to use the high END ones more than he would like and as a result this can physically exhaust him during a combat.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

Hyper-Man speaks wisdom.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

When I build a character, I will generally figure out their typical END use per PHA (including attack, defense, and some move), multiply it by their SPD to get their END use per Turn. Then I buy enough END to last 2-3 turns, which is as long as most battles take im my games. I don't usually bother to track END for these characters (NPCs primarily) just to keep things simple, unless there are unusual circumstances. You can do this either by buying lots of END or buying a little END but put Reduced END on your powers. END is cheap, so that is the easy way, but Reduced END powers let you get back into the fight more quickly if you get K'Oed or if someone has an END Drain.

 

For PCs, I follow the same general rule, but a PC will often have special powers or attacks that eat a lot of END. In those cases I do track END, and managing their energy resources becomes part of the fun of playing the character. Hyper-Man has good suggestions for the top end powers costing more END. Pushing is often appropriate, but if you are pushing your powers every battle, then you should probably consider reworking the powers to better reflect what you want out of the character.

[SuperKlaus]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

When I build a character, I will generally figure out their typical END use per PHA (including attack, defense, and some move), multiply it by their SPD to get their END use per Turn. Then I buy enough END to last 2-3 turns, which is as long as most battles take im my games. I don't usually bother to track END for these characters (NPCs primarily) just to keep things simple, unless there are unusual circumstances. You can do this either by buying lots of END or buying a little END but put Reduced END on your powers. END is cheap, so that is the easy way, but Reduced END powers let you get back into the fight more quickly if you get K'Oed or if someone has an END Drain.

 

For PCs, I follow the same general rule, but a PC will often have special powers or attacks that eat a lot of END. In those cases I do track END, and managing their energy resources becomes part of the fun of playing the character. Hyper-Man has good suggestions for the top end powers costing more END. Pushing is often appropriate, but if you are pushing your powers every battle, then you should probably consider reworking the powers to better reflect what you want out of the character.

 

This is excellent advice because that's exactly how I do it. Guess-timate END per Phase, figure out END per Turn, buy enough to last as long as a fight will go (also 2 or 3 Turns in what I've played). I've come to the realization that doing this all but takes END out of the game and I'm thinking about how to axe it officially...but that's kind of another topic.

 

You should definitely give PCs enough bonus points to buy their Movement to 0 END by the way. Tracking movement END is the single biggest pain in the ass of HERO combat and slows the game down in a really aggravating way.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

It's great for taking END out of 'mundane' combats. But END is great for handling Big Boss fights or other situations where characters want to Push their abilities and might be burning STUN in place of END by Turn 2.

[Greywind]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

I used to have an energy projector that his high end attack was a no range explosion that took all his END and then some. He usually knocked himself out doing it. As the editions changed and the characters changed to keep up, to get the same effect, I either ended up having to reduce his overall END value, or overvalue the ability to get a higher END usage multiple.

[ned-kogar]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

Sound advice given so far.

 

Placing Increased END on only, say, the upper half of your character's main attack powers is an alternative to relying on pushing.

 

Also, depending on the character concept, perhaps it's appropriate to represent his having to work hard in some other way - is it because he's half-undead? Strain of power-use could be done with Side Effects, perhaps reducing Str and/or Con: he needs energy to maintain his physical state, and starts to decay if too much is used elsewhere. Or Ego, if this half-undead chap is resisting a Psychological Complication relating to the need for flesh: the harder he works, the harder it gets for him to resist the urge.. for Brainzz. It's a different mechanic to END, but might be worth playing with depending on the character.

 

Even without characters who have a particular energy defecit, I really like END in my supers games (we even use Long Term Endurance, when the scenario suits it), but that's cos we like facing real world problems with superpowered individuals... eg. the players fly 400 miles to get to a fight... they're not going to be too fresh once they get there, but it's heroic for them to get stuck in, rather than rest a while. It also means that our electrical hero's absorption to END, or our psychic's use of illegal END-enhancing drugs, come into play an appropriate amount.

 

Ned

[prestidigitator]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

What exactly does "half undead" mean, anyway?

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

What exactly does "half undead" mean' date=' anyway? [/quote']

A quarter alive.

 

...It wants to eat your pesos.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

A quarter alive.

 

...It wants to eat your pesos.

LOL. Fair enough. Can't give rep though.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

LOL. Fair enough. Can't give rep though.

Thanks anyway.

[Utech]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

A note on pushing: Not every GM allows Players to push their Powers or Strength very often. In many campaigns the pushing rules are only to be used in very dramatic moments. You can easily build a Power that simulates pushing (though you have to pay for it) if that's something you want your character doing all the time.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

Cross posted from a related thread:

 

from 6e2 page 27

Train/subway: STR 55-65, movement 80-160m

Noncombat (or up to 672m for bullet trains)

the rules are on page 26.

20m of movement = +5 STR

 

Given this, my 400 point 6e version of Superman could get up to a 120 STR (135 adding Flight) with his Kryptonian VPP.

 

To get the maximum +75 STR bonus (60 active Density Increase) would require an appropriate additional -1/2 Limitation (like Concentration or Extra Time; Extra Phase). Add in up to 60m Flight (with Extra Time) and he could get up to a 135 "lifting" STR (before Pushing) that would cost a minimum of 22 END per Phase* to use (2 for base 45 STR + 8 for +75 STR from Density + 6 for Density Increase itself + 6 for Flight). That level of effort would knock him out in under 2 Turns.

 

*That's without taking any Increased END Limitation.

[Kruhl Sentru]

Re: Limitation: Increased Endurance Cost, Good or Bad Idea?

 

What exactly does "half undead" mean' date=' anyway? [/quote']

 

It basically means that they're somewhere between living and undead. For example, perhaps they were cursed and are slowly becoming undead, but haven't quite gotten to "braaaaaains" stage yet.