Few questions about point costs

[Thane]

Hello,

 

it's my first post here on the board, so I'd like to say hi to everyone.

 

Next thing - I've been searching through the threads to find some answers, but couldn't find anything that would help me, so I thought I'd ask more experienced poeple directly

 

I've been gaming with my group for about 10 years now, and we've only recently switched from GURPS 4e to HERO 6e to check it out. We like it and it seems HERO is handling our preferences as to "how a game should look" really well without 2 tons of optional / house rules to make it cinematic. Next thing is, while my players, after 4 years with GURPS are not able to make characters themselves, they seem to have no such problems in HERO. Because of this (and many other things) we plan to convert our main campaign that has been going on for quite some time to the new rules. This is a "fantasy world, which evolved to a more or less contemporary setting with all the varied races and magical technology which enables interstellar travel".

Conversion however, brings few issues:

1. Our group currently has 2 players and me, the GM. This brings "competence" issues into play. Two characters have to be quite competent in many areas to be able to handle all their adventures. We have a vampire brick (he's tough because of vampiric regeneration and powers which you could call "gravity powers" - Density Increase was an obvious choice) who is also highly skilled in social situations and a half-drake gadgeteer (not the VPP sort - the "lots of power frameworks" sort) who is also highly skilled in "roguish" skills (Security, Lockpicking etc.) as well as tech, and has some piloting skills.

2. I am still far away from having a "system-intuition" in terms of stat-balance, so as for now - I often use the "power-level" comparison table to measure what is acceptable and what is not. While converting (it's a "spirit of the character" conversion - not an exact one - we reason from effects, so to say ;-) ), we've encoutered a problem with Complications / Power balance. The vampire character obviously has many more complications than the half-drake gadgeteer, but he's also more powerful (his innate vampiric powers, which he rarely ever uses, cost little, but it all adds up and the regeneration is quite expensive). I would be truly grateful for any advice how to handle such issues from those with more experience. I'm not really comfortable with handwaving anything in HERO right now

Can you count a racial package deal simply by substracting the number of points in complications from the total worth? It seems many people do this, but it also seems it worked like this in 5e - 6e doesn't provide an answer (or maybe I've missed it). If so, what ammount would be "a reasonable maximum of complications decreasing package deal cost" in such a calculation?

3. This brings me to another issue - the characters, while having characteristics, active power costs and defenses in "Standard Power Supers" range (the 400-point one), are worth more or less (we havn't finished converting as for now) between 560 (gadgeteer) and 690 (vampire brick) points. This also results from the ammount of skills they have (above 100 points), but that is probably to be expected in a group of two. But I have no idea how to balance their stats and powers with oneanother so that one doesn't come much stronger than the other and so that both can have potential in a fight.

 

Well, aside from that, any hints for balancing things with only two players would be welcome.

Oh, and last thing - how would you handle assets (bases, vehicles, followers, contacts, money, etc.) - if both characters make equal use of them, would you count points for them? I don't usually do this - these things are always in motion, switch, change, etc. - I don't see any reason to force players to pay for them, but I may be missing something.

[Christopher]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Welcome aboard.

2. You could give him a higher power level. But that would mean he always was more powerfull in the first place. You should try some weak regeneration at first, and see how easily character get Body actually (normally never from Normal Damage attacks if the defenses are on the normal level, that is for sure).

For Racial Deals you do not substract Complications from Abilites. Templates are only a "must have" everything thing. From what I heard it was never supposed to work on substraction, even back in 5E.

 

Bases/Vehicles: The usual way is that for shared vehicles/bases, everyone takes a part of the cost. But, as a GM you can give it to them for Free as the basis for the adventures.

[Ice9]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

This brings me to another issue - the characters, while having characteristics, active power costs and defenses in "Standard Power Supers" range (the 400-point one), are worth more or less (we havn't finished converting as for now) between 560 (gadgeteer) and 690 (vampire brick) points.

I'm not going to say total points are irrelevant, but benchmarks like attack DCs, amount of DEF, CVs, and SPD are usually a much better indicator of power level. Especially when you're new to the system and/or not trying to optimize your points, it's not unusual for a character with the same effectiveness to cost many more points.

 

For example, I've had characters with the same overall effectiveness cost:

400p - Character I created for a campaign.

~525p - Pregen character for a convention game I was running.

~700p - Character I made for fun, with no eye towards using points efficiently.

 

If you post the characters on here, you can get some feedback on how they compare to each-other and to the default Champions power level.

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Well, I'll probably post them when they are completely finished, but the main difference results from the fact that one character has racial abilities (which, back in GURPS, were neutralized by drawbacks - disadvantages) and the other one has none.

One character has got a total of 120 points in complications, the other 50. And the one with 120 points in complications also has more points total. I like the HERO way of doing this better - not counting complications as "minus points" for racial templates is, I think, a wise choice that keeps the game from being a crippled superheroes fest or picking "races which have the abilities that matter" in D&D manner 99% of the time.

But in case of vampires (and probably were-creatures, but none of my players like these), the 1%, some of the complications aquired with power are obviously impairing the character in a very climatic manner (cannot enter a sanctified location uninvited, greater damage from silver and fire, social stigma and issues with the fact that vampires are not loved by most people are the ones we have in our games - no sunlight, no other 0/1 (kill or mean nothing) stuff). I would just take away some of his abilities and take away the drawbacks, but that would ruin the characters spirit. That's the main idea behind seeking a way to somehow include them - treating 1 point of complication as -1 point to the package deal does not seem like a good idea however.

 

They have comparable DCs, CVs, points in skills, Defences and attributes (vampire has 4 spd, while gadgeteer has 5) - the difference in points is mainly due to powers such as the ability to create a vampire (which was used once during 4 years of weekly game sessions), which is quite limited and others, especially LifeSupport, that add up. I've made some of them weaker than they were when I've posted the thread, but the difference is still quite large, though about 70 points instead of more than 100:

 

[7] Severe Transform 1d6; Living host into a vampire,

Healing condition: Killing the father vampire before the young vampire kills to feed, a subject who resists the temptation before transform never feeds and goes into a coma from thirst;

Constant, Partial Transform; Extra Time (1 Minute), Requires A Roll (9-), No Range

 

He also has:

[10] Vampire Blood Drinking: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6-1, Increased STUN Multiplier (+1), Reduced Endurance (to 0 END); Must have the target in a Grab or target must be willing; -1/2, No Knockback.

 

[12] Unkillable: Regeneration (1 per hour), Resurrection, Can Heal Limbs [i don't even know if heal limbs is legal with "Resurrection only"];

Inherent; Resurrection Only, Hindrance (Pierced Heart and/or Head cut off; -1/4), Conditional (Does not work or is weaker if the character is not supplied with enough blood while regenerating; -1/4)

Never works if: the vampire is fully drained from blood - then, if killed by anything, he's dead.

 

[11] Blood Healing: Regeneration (1 per minute), Inherent; Hindrance Power (Pierced Heart and/or Head cut off -1/4), Conditional (Does not work or is weaker if the character drinks too little blood; -1/4)

Never works if: the vampire is fully drained from blood

 

and 36 points in life support, plus No Hit Locations automaton power (except for the heart, which is targeted as head and has the same effects as head and limbs, which can be crippled just as for a normal human) - this was the only way to cope with the vampiric metaphysics of "the brain is gone and doesn't do anything, the head is not the center of consciousness but is needed for the vampire to recover and see / hear / smell / taste, the organs are dead and useless, he can be hit anywhere, but he's still a just organic matter, except for the heart and centres of perception - and the limbs are weaker because there is less matter in them, but they are as dead as dead can be".

 

The rest of the difference is placed mostly in skills on some basic level (he used his long life to learn many, many things) and in his vampiric meta-sense (sense that detects other vampires and their undead servants - he can judge if a zombie is under control of a vampire - setting thing - I don't have it in understandable format as for now). Both characters powers are more or less on the same level - the vamp character is best compared to a brick, he has higher defences and reductions (in the high range of Standard Power Level), while the gadgeteer is faster and deals more damage and has some nice toys. While they fit the "Standard" level of damage, attributes etc. nicely, they both have much more points than suggested by the book for that level - that's the whole issue that makes me wonder what we're doing wrong. I am experienced enough as a GM in overall that I can judge that they are about equal in power outside of combat (and the book says they are more or less on the same level in combat - I believe, because their "numbers" are close and they are balanced as far as I can tell within the limits of my experience with HERO). Balancing them in point totals is a thing of estetics and preference from the point of players - they like to differ when it's because of how much exp they got, not because of something else. Next thing is that I can't yet get an image of "what would be challenging" and their point totals vary significantly enough for me to start to think.

Thus - the question about complications. I wouldn't want to force the gadgeteer to add more - because that's just silly Yet the fact that the vampire has much more complications (and I will keep all of them probably - they are essential to the character) has no direct impact on his ability to get some more powers (like balancing out the racial stuff he rarely ever uses).

 

EDIT:

For some comparison:

The vampire has most characteristic rolls between 11- and 13-, except for str, which is 25/50 (DI) and PRE 35, OCV of 10, DCV of 8 (+4 CSLs), DMCV 8, SPD 4, his HKA deals 3d top, he has a gravity multipower (40p) with TK 25, barrier, flight, grav-blast with double knockback (and custom controlled knockback - he can shift the angle of knockback by 90 degrees for +1/4), double knockback for fists and enviro-control (gravity), highest skillroll of 15- (Persuasion) and average skillroll of 13-, 5/22 PD, 2/19 ED, 12 of both rPD and rED (15 when using his multipower for defence).

 

Gadgeteer has similar, but somewhat higher attributes (though he has INT 30), OCV of 9, DCV of 10 (+3 CSLs, pistols have optics for +3 OCV), some maneuvers (strafe and the like) and PSLs for range / called shots, two-weapon fighting for ranged, ambidex etc., DMCV 9, SPD 5, his RKA deals 3d, blast deals 12d [both are beam-magic-pistol-mods, he has two of those pistols], he has some grenades (entangle, darkness to sight group, but nothing too fancy, they have less AP than the other attacks in his "Offensive Gadgets" framework), can fly on his wings, has a tail with a sharp ending, he also has an OmniTool/PipBoy/whatever you call it that has a magical cpu (it's called a "golem" and has similar functionality as todays notebook) with radar/radio (powered from the same "battery" as his armor - Defensive Gadget framework), the defensive framework is an armor that gives him about 20 PD/ED, 10 rPD/rED, but this varies - he can switch power to infrared optics, few other "optics" or use it to aid his flight with magical thrusters - or use the PiPBoy - I am still thinking about moving the radar/radio out of this framework, as we know it's of much more use outside of combat and the frameworks are supposed to be used for balancing varied options in combat time - the player agrees, so it's probably +20 points more for him, his highest skills are tech skills of 15-, but he has fewer skills than the vampire, albeit at higher levels.

 

They have REC in 10-15 range, END in 45-55 range. The vampire has 25 BODY and 50 STUN, the gadgeteer has 15 BODY and 40 STUN.

[Lucius]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

I've been gaming with my group for about 10 years now, and we've only recently switched from GURPS 4e to HERO 6e to check it out. We like it and it seems HERO is handling our preferences as to "how a game should look" really well without 2 tons of optional / house rules to make it cinematic. Next thing is, while my players, after 4 years with GURPS are not able to make characters themselves, they seem to have no such problems in HERO. Because of this (and many other things) we plan to convert our main campaign that has been going on for quite some time to the new rules.

 

That's fantastic! Can I quote you on that?

 

I am still far away from having a "system-intuition" in terms of stat-balance, so as for now - I often use the "power-level" comparison table to measure what is acceptable and what is not. While converting (it's a "spirit of the character" conversion - not an exact one - we reason from effects, so to say ;-) ),

 

Excellent – some people have a hard time grasping that.

 

we've encoutered a problem with Complications / Power balance.

 

It's a Complicated issue.

 

Can you count a racial package deal simply by substracting the number of points in complications from the total worth? It seems many people do this, but it also seems it worked like this in 5e - 6e doesn't provide an answer (or maybe I've missed it). If so, what ammount would be "a reasonable maximum of complications decreasing package deal cost" in such a calculation?

 

Officially, no. However, people have done it and it seems to have worked for them; perhaps you can try it out and see how it works for your group in practice.

 

This brings me to another issue - the characters' date=' while having characteristics, active power costs and defenses in "Standard Power Supers" range (the 400-point one), are worth more or less (we havn't finished converting as for now) between 560 (gadgeteer) and 690 (vampire brick) points.[/quote']

 

One way in which the current edition is a step backwards is in the way Complications are presented. Previous editions were much clearer. But I'll try to explain my proposal for you in the language of the current edition.

 

Use the Vampire as your “standard” and say your campaign guidelines are for 690 pt characters with, say, 150 pts of Complications. See if you can scare up another 30 pts of Complications for the vampire.

 

The gadgeteer's Complicatons total 100 pts less than the vampire, so the gadgeteer's TOTAL points should also be 100 pts less. At 560 to 690, you now have only a 30 pt gap. If you couldn't justify more Complications on the vampire, it's still only a 60 pts gap. Now to close that gap.

 

Here's one way:

 

Well, aside from that, any hints for balancing things with only two players would be welcome.

Oh, and last thing - how would you handle assets (bases, vehicles, followers, contacts, money, etc.) - if both characters make equal use of them, would you count points for them? I don't usually do this - these things are always in motion, switch, change, etc. - I don't see any reason to force players to pay for them, but I may be missing something.

 

While I agree generally about contacts and money and many other Perks, and if you let them gain and lose bases and vehicles frequently you may have a point about your own style of play, you may want to consider giving the gadgeteer a Variable Power Pool for vehicles, possibly even bases, and equipment that is temporary in nature – since it seems logical that the gadgeteer is going to be the one maintaining and controlling such things, right? Yes, this does involve a “handwave” of sorts in so far as Perks are not usually supposed to go in Variable Power Pools, but it's been done before. If you want to be more book legal, instead of a Variable Power Pool you can use a Summon Power for Vehicles and Bases – I can write up an example if you like.

 

You can also consider “invisible powers” that you can arguably say the character may have always had or that can be added without changing the “flavor” too much – Luck or Combat Luck come to mind. 2D6 Luck is useful, doesn't change most character concepts, and closes 10 pts of that gap.

 

Here's another point to consider:

 

But in case of vampires, some of the complications aquired with power are obviously impairing the character in a very climatic manner (cannot enter a sanctified location uninvited, greater damage from silver and fire, social stigma and issues with the fact that vampires are not loved by most people are the ones we have in our games - no sunlight, no other 0/1 (kill or mean nothing) stuff). I would just take away some of his abilities and take away the drawbacks, but that would ruin the characters spirit.

 

One possibility is to change some of those Complications into Side Effects on the vampire's abilities. In particular, a Side Effect on a Power that's a more or less constant part of the character would function much like a Complication.

 

Also note that it's possible to put Limitations on Characteristics and Movement. If the vampire's STR, BOD, and all Movement Powers are all bought with a limitation “Not on holy ground (without invitation)” then the vampire could step into a sanctified area but would immediately collapse helplessly. Granted it would only be a -1/4 Limitation but it would cut the vampires point total some.

 

Speaking of cutting point totals, make sure on both that you compare their SPD X Movement to what their total movement in 12 seconds should be. If their Running speed is supposed to be the same, for example, and you give the gadgeteer a SPD of 3 and the vampire a SPD of 4, the vampire should have fewer meters of Running than the gadgeteer. Granted, you probably do want the vampire to have a higher ground speed but you might find you can shave a few points from what you thought his Running and Flying or whatever should be and still be true to concept.

 

They have comparable DCs, CVs, points in skills, Defences and attributes - the difference in points is mainly due to powers such as the ability to create a vampire (which was used once during 4 years of weekly game sessions), which is quite limited:

 

Abilities which in practice never come into play are sometimes considered “free.” Once in 4 years might qualify as close to “never.”

 

No Hit Locations automaton power (except for the heart, which is targeted as head and has the same effects as head) - this was the only way to cope with the vampiric metaphysics of "the brain is gone and doesn't do anything, the head is not the center of consciousness, the organs are dead and useless, he can be hit anywhere, but he's still a just organic matter, except for the heart".

 

That's not metaphysics that's physiology. Yes, I'm being pedantic.

 

Since you're going for cinematic rather than gritty realistic, you might decide to just not use Hit Locations except maybe for called shots. In which case, you can drop this particular ability. (Yes, someone taking a called shot to the head on the vampire may still be in for a nasty shock, but it will happen seldom enough you can possibly get away with handwaving that.)

 

The rest of the difference is placed mostly in skills on some basic level (he used his long life to learn many, many things)

 

Another candidate for “Seldom of use, so free” or for condensing. May I suggest:

 

KS: Things Learned in a Long Vampiric Existence

 

Cramming, with a Limitation “Only to refamiliarize self with things previously learned over the last X centuries.” Just because he spent ten years working as a plumber a hundred years ago doesn't mean he can pick up a toolbox and go right to work as though he retired from that job yesterday....

 

If there's a lot of Languages, consider “Universal Translator, only for Languages the character has known during previous phases of their existence.” Or maybe buying the Languages at a lesser level (“Sure I was fluent in it two hundred years ago, but between the language changing and the stuff I've forgotten....”)

 

 

I'm sure not all of these ideas will prove useful, but I hope that some of them at least will help you.

 

Now I have to go back and see what was posted while I was composing that.....

 

Lucius Alexander

 

House of the Palindromedary

[Lucius]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

grav-blast with double knockback (and custom controlled knockback - he can shift the angle of knockback by 90 degrees for +1/4)' date=' [/quote']

 

Look at the Indirect Advantage.

 

Gadgeteer has.... SPD 5,

 

SPEED FIVE?!?!

 

Granted a lot depends on what kind of SPD you want to give their opposition, but are you sure the gadgeteer needs a higher SPD than the vampire?

 

his RKA deals 3d, blast deals 12d [both are beam-magic-pistol-mods, he has two of those pistols],

 

There's a rule that if you buy an item as a Focus, you can get another just like it for 5 pts, or four for 10 pts, etc. Not sure if you're already using that rule.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

so by spending 30 pts I get another 64 palindromedaries

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

That's fantastic! Can I quote you on that?

Why not - my players are very rule savvy in terms of GURPS, as am I, but, as a realistic system, every single non-realistic issue has to be handled with a lot of house rules / limitation magic. Most SFXs are worth something - either as a limitation or as an advantage on a power. And none of my players can do things like "to change the SFX of Snatcher to "I create the item from force fields instead of summoning it from other dimention" you need to have about +x to cost" by themselves - they have to ask me to do it, as just about everything needs to be somehow adjudicated in a non-realistic campaign.

 

But I'll try to explain my proposal for you in the language of the current edition.

 

Use the Vampire as your “standard” and say your campaign guidelines are for 690 pt characters with, say, 150 pts of Complications. See if you can scare up another 30 pts of Complications for the vampire.

 

The gadgeteer's Complicatons total 100 pts less than the vampire, so the gadgeteer's TOTAL points should also be 100 pts less. At 560 to 690, you now have only a 30 pt gap. If you couldn't justify more Complications on the vampire, it's still only a 60 pts gap. Now to close that gap.

[/Quote]

De facto - use complications as "minus points" at 1:1 ratio.

 

While I agree generally about contacts and money and many other Perks, and if you let them gain and lose bases and vehicles frequently you may have a point about your own style of play, you may want to consider giving the gadgeteer a Variable Power Pool for vehicles, possibly even bases, and equipment that is temporary in nature – since it seems logical that the gadgeteer is going to be the one maintaining and controlling such things, right? Yes, this does involve a “handwave” of sorts in so far as Perks are not usually supposed to go in Variable Power Pools, but it's been done before. If you want to be more book legal, instead of a Variable Power Pool you can use a Summon Power for Vehicles and Bases – I can write up an example if you like.

 

You can also consider “invisible powers” that you can arguably say the character may have always had or that can be added without changing the “flavor” too much – Luck or Combat Luck come to mind. 2D6 Luck is useful, doesn't change most character concepts, and closes 10 pts of that gap.

[/Quote]

I wouldn't call it "frequently", but they often sell one "base" and aquire another, better suited to the tasks at hand. It's a trademark of their characters to buy a new base and change vehicles every now and then. I've been thinking about VPPs, but we're not feeling system-savvy enough to use them without bogging down the game as for now.

 

One possibility is to change some of those Complications into Side Effects on the vampire's abilities. In particular, a Side Effect on a Power that's a more or less constant part of the character would function much like a Complication.

I've been thinking about this, but I am not sure about what would work and what would not.

 

Speaking of cutting point totals, make sure on both that you compare their SPD X Movement to what their total movement in 12 seconds should be. If their Running speed is supposed to be the same, for example, and you give the gadgeteer a SPD of 3 and the vampire a SPD of 4, the vampire should have fewer meters of Running than the gadgeteer. Granted, you probably do want the vampire to have a higher ground speed but you might find you can shave a few points from what you thought his Running and Flying or whatever should be and still be true to concept.

[/Quote]

More or less the same - vampire has lower SPD but higher movement rate - they can run / fly more or less at the same speed out of combat. In combat, the gadgeteer is faster, because well... he always was faster.

 

Abilities which in practice never come into play are sometimes considered “free.” Once in 4 years might qualify as close to “never.”

I've been thinking about this, but it's not a "genre" thing or a "pact with the GM" not to use the ability. He has just used it once because he doesn't really like changing people into vampires - but it might happen. And it's a psychological warfare ability - the whole thing is about being able to use it as such. That's why I'm charging for it nonetheless.

 

That's not metaphysics that's physiology. Yes, I'm being pedantic.

[/Quote]

My bad.

 

Since you're going for cinematic rather than gritty realistic, you might decide to just not use Hit Locations except maybe for called shots. In which case, you can drop this particular ability. (Yes, someone taking a called shot to the head on the vampire may still be in for a nasty shock, but it will happen seldom enough you can possibly get away with handwaving that.)

[/Quote]

Again - thing of taste. Called shots are included in our games - always have been. It's a basic combat tactics. Some abilities' signature difference is that they cannot be aimed at specific hit locations. I know he always needed it, I doubt hadwaving would work in hero - it's not that expensive, but gives perfectly what we need to show his anatomy.

 

Another candidate for “Seldom of use, so free” or for condensing. May I suggest:

 

KS: Things Learned in a Long Vampiric Existence

 

Cramming, with a Limitation “Only to refamiliarize self with things previously learned over the last X centuries.” Just because he spent ten years working as a plumber a hundred years ago doesn't mean he can pick up a toolbox and go right to work as though he retired from that job yesterday....

Well, that is a very good idea - I will certainly include it.

 

If there's a lot of Languages, consider “Universal Translator, only for Languages the character has known during previous phases of their existence.” Or maybe buying the Languages at a lesser level (“Sure I was fluent in it two hundred years ago, but between the language changing and the stuff I've forgotten....”)

I wasn't really thinking about languages as an issue, but this might be good.

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Look at the Indirect Advantage.

I shall.

 

SPEED FIVE?!?!

 

Granted a lot depends on what kind of SPD you want to give their opposition, but are you sure the gadgeteer needs a higher SPD than the vampire?

Let me divulge - the gadgeteer is fast, really fast, it's his signature ability to be fast. Gadgets are how he fights, but he doesn't always have them. Being fast is his trademark ability. Dragons have had a long tradition in manipulating time in the setting. He was a "young speedster" long before he became a gadgeteer.

He always used his speed to do things like "run and pick a lock" or "run and do something about the trap", or "you hold them back vampire, I'll try to fix this". As technology advanced, he became good with it. But in combat he still might go around to apply "first aid" to a normal, save someone, pick a lock, repair something, etc.

If four is "two times as fast as human" then five is "just a little faster than two times as fast as human". I've figured that if for Standard Power Level a speed of 10 is the maximum advised, 5 will not be unbalanced.

 

There's a rule that if you buy an item as a Focus, you can get another just like it for 5 pts, or four for 10 pts, etc. Not sure if you're already using that rule.

We're using it - it has a huge potential for abuse (many limbs / many items) but it seems ok when you have 2 limbs and you want two weapons ;-)

 

Edit: my previous post didn't add itself it seems so:

You probably can quote that but where and why is a good question ;-) it's not that I think GURPS is evil - it's a good system, it handles low-point games excellent. It even handles high-point games good. But it's far from balanced. I mean, it is, but in a "realistic" way, not "balanced" as "you are likely to get two characters of similar power with similar number of points". That's why it handles transition between power levels in a poor way. The point differences add up during character development and quickly a strong character pays tons of points for his strenght, while not getting even 1/4th the damage a character with "blast" does. Since we need mechanics mostly for combat and the rest is less relevant (from mechanical view, not from campaign view - combat is less relevant in setting, but it's the only thing that's entirely handled by game mechanics, not character-character interactions and roleplaying), this gets tough. As with "to deal more than 1d damage per 40 points of ST your friend deals with 9 points in his modified ranged attack, you need to be a weapon master to get +2/die to damage". "But my character shouldn't be a weapon master - he's as bricky as a brick could get, finesse is the last word to describe him". And after a while "so we'll do it this way: weapon master as "I can use my strenght to maximum effect" advantage", with handwaved limitations of this and that. And it gives you better Parries (less penalty). "Ok". Next thing "you feel your char is weak because you're buying ST as a human-sized being, you will probably need Power Blow skill for this ST to be worth it", "but this is a martial skill for AD&D monks and the sort", "we'll switch it to work differently". "Ok, how". Etc.

Characters often die, even the powered "heroes", or are completely untouchable. This is realistic, but it becomes a nuissance. To make GURPS bend in a cinematic manner and add some intrinsic "combat" balance instead of "realistic" one, we needed 34 pages of house rules - and even then, it's getting harder and harder to keep the balance between the characters with similar ammount of points but different conceptions. We usually finished a campaign before this ever became important, but this one is a special case. A friend on the GURPS forum proposed HERO as a possible sollution to our issues, and it seems to be built on our gaming philosophy - "combat is important from mechanical point of view because it needs to be balanced in mechanics and expensive, while other stuff doesn't matter as much from system's standpoint and how other stuff is handled depends on the group - while combat is handled the same way by everyone - by the rules, while the values of non-combat stuff vary significantly from group to group, setting to setting and genre to genre, hence can be handled in a simplified manner". We like the fact that combat skills are expensive, while mundane skills are not. Having social skills in our games is a fashion statement - they come into play, but 95% of interactions are handled completely without them. But the player who finds himself to always do the talking (the other player doesn't really like to lead the conversation - he likes to say something from time to time, but he's into other stuff) buys the skills because he thinks it's reasonable.

Well, we like many things about HERO, like the fact that SFX is worth nothing unless it really gives something. In GURPS, every single SFX thing is worth something, and that gives players a headache even after years of playing, which renders them unable to create their own characters without serious help from the GM - like "the fact that fire can be extinguished with water and vacuum is worth -5% usually, but we have fire extinguishers here and mages who can control fire, so is it worth more?". And without the GURPS version of Hero Designer, you are crippled (even I can't do the math in my head after all those years), while HERO is easy to grasp - we've used pencil-filled character sheets for the first time since our Warhammer 1ed games ;-)

 

As for the above options - I like the skills / language ideas a lot. They will probably solve many issues.

As for the template - that solution would really lead to an effect of substracting complications from racial package cost in 1:1 ratio. Is that ok? If so, I may just do it directly.

 

As for side effects - I don't really feel comfortable with doing it like that yet, as I can't forsee the effect on balance allowing "Racial disadvantages" to limit racial abilities will have.

 

As for the "never used" - it's not a "GM with player pact" or "genre thing" not to use this ability. He may use it any time he wants, it's just he did this only once as for now. But it's certainly a psychological warfare ability - I charge points for it because of how useful it is in "negotiations" in many cases.

 

As for bases / vehicles - they sell the old and buy the new on a regular basis. One thing this helps with is enemies, other - not losing to much money on upgrades. If they tend to have an upper-class space frigate, they sell their old frigate for 80-90% of what they paid for it and they go to buy a better one. Same thing with "bases" - they often sell one house/building to buy another, suited to their needs better. They have a single "base" that is an exception and this I will probably make them pay for (sounded like revenge statement). The 5-point double rule should handle the rest quite easily. I'll just let them switch these "5-point" bases and vehicles.

[dmjalund]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

for the gadgeteer, may I suggest Penalty Skill levels on gadget related skills, only to counteract (doing it quickly) penalties.

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

for the gadgeteer' date=' may I suggest Penalty Skill levels on gadget related skills, only to counteract (doing it quickly) penalties.[/quote']

Is this really needed? I mean - I don't see how SPD 5 may be a problem, but it's probably due to a lack of experience, as everyone seems to treat it like a problem

Buying penalty skill levels for every skill he likes to use quickly would be counterproductive in this case.

[Lucius]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Is this really needed? I mean - I don't see how SPD 5 may be a problem, but it's probably due to a lack of experience, as everyone seems to treat it like a problem

Buying penalty skill levels for every skill he likes to use quickly would be counterproductive in this case.

 

I think the intention is to buy OVERALL Skill Levels that apply to all his skills, or a large group, and apply a Limitation "only to act swiftly."

 

I think they usual way they work is that every two Skill Levels can move you one step down the "Time Chart." So if a simple repair would normally take five minutes, and you have four such Levels, you can do it in one Turn (12 seconds) at no penalty, or in a single Phase at -2.

 

That's one thing I didn't think of - you may have spent a lot of points buying up each Skill individually, because that's how it's done in GURPS, instead of buying Skill Levels that can apply to many different Skills. Skill heavy characters should definitely consider buying Skill Levels that leverage skills in large groups.

 

edit: My reaction to the SPD is partly because I think more in terms of the heroic level of play, rather than superheroic. They way you've described the character, I could even see taking it up to SPD 6.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary Skill Level: +1 with Riding (Palindromedary), Animal Handler (Palindromedary), Trading (if buying and selling palindromedaries), Tracking (palindromedaries), Paramedic (if treating a palindromedary) and Knowledge Skill: Palindromedaries

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Well it certainly is a superheroic game right now - and my players like the idea behind paying points for equipment. As one of them said "hell, maybe that would make our Star Wars campaign few years back a success instead of an epic failure of how a 250-point soldier owns a 1.250-point jedi because it's TL 11 and a simple blaster rifle plus stormtrooper armor is worth more than 800 points, not even counting extra senses etc."

 

It just that they have quite high point totals when compared to what the book calls "standard power level". Maybe I'm not yet proficient in point-economy enough to help them balance these things.

 

I didn't figure out buying OSLs with limitations

 

I like the "power level" tables as they are a great reference until you get a good grasp on the system.

[Lucius]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

As for the template - that solution would really lead to an effect of substracting complications from racial package cost in 1:1 ratio. Is that ok? If so, I may just do it directly.

 

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "template" but I'll address what I think you're saying and hope I don't put my foot in my mouse.

 

 

Let me go back to the old way of describing Complications (they were called "Disadvantages" then but the name change was a good idea.)

 

To create a character, you get a number (X) of Base Points to start with. These points are "free." Then you can have up to a certain number (Y) of Complications, which add to those Base Points. Your Total Points (Z) available for character building are then equal to to the Base Points, plus Complication Points:

 

X+Y=Z

 

The way the rules do it now, they give you Z and Y, but leave X sort of implied, which I think is much more confusing.

 

 

So, as the one running the game, you get to set the values of Z and Y and therefore, of course, X. The thing to understand is that if you say, for example, "The campaign maximum points for Complications is 150" it is not mandatory for every character to take that much in Complications. That's not by default mandatory in 6th edition and hasn't been mandatory under any prior dispensation. It's just that if a character only has, for example, 50 pts of Complications instead of 150, their Total Points must also be 100 less than the "standard" (really, the maximum.)

 

 

 

So when you say "substracting complications from racial package cost in 1:1 ratio" I'm a little baffled because, at least in terms of what I was proposing -and I take this as a response to my post, correct me if I'm wrong - "racial package cost" is a completely meaningless term. The 1 to 1 ratio exists between Character Points and Complicaton Points. It doesn't matter if 200 points or 100 points or 0 points are spent on some "racial package cost." If the person running the game says "We're building 400 point characters with 150 pts in Complications" and I decide to completely forgo Complications, I get a character with 250 Total Points. If I take 100 pts in Complications, my total is 350 Character Points to build my character with. If I take the full 150 points, I get the full amount of 400 which is the maximum available for a starting character. In fact I can take 200 points in Complications but I'm still restricted to only 400 Total Points.

 

Now, if for some reason you're more comfortable saying "50 points in complications" and then setting up some Package Deal for the vampire that subtracts 100 points of Complications from 100+ points of Powers that are all linked by being part of defining the character as a vampire, knock yourself out. It just strikes me as being needlessly complicated compared to setting a maximum of 150 in Complications and letting one character be below that maximum.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary Package Deal

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Well, that might be the difference of perspective and estetics.

 

For me, saying that "Package Deal is worth X, and with Y complications it's worth X-Y" is a lot simpler than doing all the max / required math I just thought it doesn't really work that way (as in "can't work that way no matter what) because points from complications are not exactly worth the same as other points and the system is only a "reward for making the character interesting because of his flaws", not "of two characters with 200 points, the one with 40 points in complications more than the other will be worth 40 points less". Now I know that it can be, but it requires close supervision.

 

It's just that the character who is limited by his racial complications is weaker than the character who has the same powers but isn't limited by anything. I think my players will undestand "vampire package deal is worth less than it's real cost would suggest because of the disadvantages / complications you are burdened with if you chose to get it" better than "you can get full starting points only for having as much complications as the most disadvantage-filled being in the world :)".

 

You have described how it works well and I now understand exactly what's the thing about but still, making the package deal (template) cheaper because of it's inherent complications strikes me as more elegant than modification of general rules for only one casus. But that's probably because of me being a lawyer - it's in my nature ;-P but I understand why you would want to do it differently and why would it be simpler (at least for a HERO player with no bad habbits from GURPS where package deals are directly influenced in terms of cost by what disadvantages they have ;p).

 

Thanks for help.

 

I'll probably write again today after talking with my players about "what we do and how we do it" with their characters.

[Lucius]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Well, that might be the difference of perspective and estetics.

 

That probably sums it up. I certainly acknowledge that for some campaigns "Package Deal cost equals Abilites Cost minus Complications of the Package" would probably be a good idea. Some people would object and it's not "official" but I think you'll find others online here who have used it and would report that it works well.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Complication: Palindromedary

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

We've come across one issue while building the characters - so I once again turn for your help.

 

What advice would you give for CSLs / OCV / DCV ratings? If CVs advised for the standard level are in 7-13 range, do you usually take CSLs into account or not? If not, how much do you allow (and which), if yes, what balance between the three would you suggest?

 

I understand that CSLs can be much more useful (especially if wide) than bare OCV and DCV (or am I wrong?) - but it's hard to judge how many a character could/should have.

[sobran]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

I'm not going to attempt to multi-quote, as I am very tired and what I want to address is from different posts so I would doubtless mess it up. I'm just going to throw my two cents in on a few areas I think you could address. Most of this has already been covered by Lucius.

 

Skills

I will echo the sentiment that you should look into Overall Skill Levels. Given that both of these characters are skill monkeys, this will let you drastically decrease the amount of points spent here. Buy each skill they have at the base level, get enough Skill Levels to raise the vast majority to where they should be in practical use and then just cherry pick one or two that they are exceptional at to spend points on individually.

 

Another point that I didn't see mentioned, though I could have missed it, are Skill Enhancers. These handy dandy abilities make all other abilities of a certain class cheaper. For example, purchasing the "Scientist" Skill Enhancer makes all Science skills cheaper. That one in particular will help the gadgeteer. Though I realize that isn't the particular character having the point total issue, using them on both characters should help with the Point Bloat that you are experiencing as a whole. Of course, this only applies if you don't take the "KS: Shit I Learned As A Vampire" route that Lucius suggested. I would almost certainly suggest doing that for the "PS: Shitty Jobs I Did As A Vampire" skill, so you don't have to take a Professional Skill for every menial thing the character has moonlighted in for a year or decade.

 

Comlications vs Limitations

I saw Lucius address this briefly when he mentioned Side Effects. One of the things that I had a bit of trouble grasping when I first came to the Hero System is exactly what should be handled as a Limitation and what should be a Complication. Of course, in many cases it can be either and the philosophy on what qualifies for which varies by the individual. However, I will share my thoughts on the subject.

 

Generally speaking, anything that limits a character's ability to activate or target an ability or suite of abilities is better modeled as Limitations in my opinion. For example, if walking onto consecrated ground causes the vampire to immediately begin taking damage, it is a Complication. If the vampire loses all supernatural abilities while on consecrated ground, instead of or in addition to taking damage, it qualifies as a Limitation.

 

Consider: If the vampire can't use any supernatural powers on anyone with True Faith, it may be better modeled with Limitations on the applicable abilities. If the vampire is psychologically prevented from doing any harm to someone with True Faith, whether by supernatural means or mundane, then a Complication is a better fit. If the vampire can walk into a church but can't mesmerize anyone on the premises, then any and all powers with the Mesmerize SFX (whether it be Mind Control, Mental Illusions, ect) should take the Limitation "Not On Holy Ground". The value of this will vary depending on how common consecrated ground is and how often the characters will be expected to go onto holy ground for one purpose or another.

 

This one could be represented by a Complication designating power loss, going the Limitation route allows you to trim a lot of points off of the vampire and brings the total number of Complications down to a reasonable level as well. This effectively lets you divide it into the categories "stuff I need to remember about his powers" and "stuff that Complicates his life and should come up in stories." Leave the Complications to the realm of DNPCs, Psychological Compulsions (can't cross running water), and Vulnerabilities/Susceptibilities (double damage from blessed weapons, takes damage from holy symbols, ect). Let Limitations on the powers themselves handle when and how he may use them.

[sobran]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

We've come across one issue while building the characters - so I once again turn for your help.

 

What advice would you give for CSLs / OCV / DCV ratings? If CVs advised for the standard level are in 7-13 range, do you usually take CSLs into account or not? If not, how much do you allow (and which), if yes, what balance between the three would you suggest?

 

I understand that CSLs can be much more useful (especially if wide) than bare OCV and DCV (or am I wrong?) - but it's hard to judge how many a character could/should have.

 

A quick note on CVs: my understanding of the bell curve is that once you get to a disparity of 4 points or more between opponents, those on the lower end are grossly outmatched. Keep this in mind when designing the CV disparity between the two characters. If the gadgeteer has an OCV of 7, but the vampire has an OCV of 13, it will be difficult to design opponents that are credible to both. Well, that isn't entirely true: player ingenuity can overcome some of this, whether it be by AoE attacks or the higher OCV character using Entangles, Grabs, or other maneuvers to lower the DCV of opponents for the other character. Still, the wider the disparity between CVs, the narrower the range of CVs the opponents can have. In my experience, it works best if the characters are within about 3 points of one another. Others may vehemently disagree and may feel free to chime in.

 

On the CSL front, I would strongly recommend looking at this thread: http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/82091-My-character-building-technique-%28How-to-build-Hero-System-Characters%29?p=2077452#post2077452

 

(Sorry, I don't know how to build a link in BB code or otherwise.)

 

In it, Tasha describes her excellent character building guidelines. You may not wish to strictly adhere to them, as it may be tedious. On the other hand, it is very helpful when you lack the "stat intuition" you mentioned. Specifically, she mentions how CSLs should affect your consideration of a character's OCV and DCV as well as their damage output. This is because CSLs can also be used to increase the damage of an attack, a fact I often neglect to account for. This often has tragic consequences for what was intended to be my Grand Revolving Door Villain.

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Thanks for feedback - as for the skill enhancers, I understand the construction quite well and we use it right now. Well, we use most of what is in the books - it's quite simple to get the hang of it. This is the main reason behind gadgeteer having less points than the vampire, though with counting the complications so that they decrease the cost of the package deal this was greatly diminished.

 

Alas, both characters have the DCs, defences etc. mentioned as proper for 400-point characters, while having more than 500. Actually, the vampire, as for now (the character's conversion is not yet finished), has 590 points and the gadgeteer has 560. Both, however, have stats in range suggested for 400-point characters. I would normally say "well, since there's two of you it probably ok" and let it be, but we're determined not to make any mistakes that would cause problems later (as I said - this is a campaign that has been going for years). Maybe we'll run a session or two to make some sort of "HERO arena" to figure some things out with characters made only for that purpose.

 

The bell-curve is something I have in mind (rolling 3d6s is what I've been doing for the last years), but the CSL really elude me mainly due to the array of possibilities they bring, including the ability to increase damage output. Being able to use CSLs in such a variety of way makes it hard to "feel" how they affect overall power level of the characters - OCV and DCV are quite simple and the calculations behind them understandable. But to know how CSLs are "powerful" requires experience.

 

The other thing are martial maneuvers - the characters do know a lot of them (they've been learning quite a lot of them for quite some time). How much of those do you think is reasonable?

 

As for the Tasha's thread - I've read it, but "average campaign DCs", "average campaign OCV/DCV" is actually what I'm trying to figure out unfortunately, these guidelines are perfect for new players who play with a seasoned GM (or seasoned GM to know what info to provide to seasoned players). It doesn't help in any regard as to how to figure out what I want to be the average and what an "average" super on this level is worth. It's supposed to be the standard level, but it just doesn't add up that way and I don't want any bad habbits from GURPS to stay on character creation - a thing we rarely ever do. That's why it's so important.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

I suggest looking at the JLA thread in my signature below for an example of a team with some characters more powerful than others while built on seemingly equal points. (Superman is basically an anti-vampire).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

The bell curve point is made above. OCV scales faster than DCV due to the 11- base roll if CV’s are equal (a 62.5% chance to hit). Let’s bump the target’s DCV by:

 

1 – 50% chance to hit

2 – 37.5% chance to hit (ie a hit is 25% less likely – in d20 terms, a -5 penalty to the attacker)

3 – 25.93% chance to hit

4 – 16.2% chance to hit

5 – 9.26% chance to hit

 

If, instead, we bump attacker OCV above defender DCV, we get:

 

1 – 74.07% chance to hit

2 – 83.80% chance to hit (a bit more than a 20% increase in likelihood – effectively a +4 bonus in d20 terms)

3 – 90.74% chance to hit

4 – 95.37% chance to hit

5 – 98.15% chance to hit

 

The question of CSL’s comes up frequently, and has no easy answer. Let’s say our game has max CV’s of 13, and max DC’s of 12. If I exclude your levels from the max, a character could have 13 OCV, 13 DCV and 12 DC’s. Bumping any of the three can make him virtually unhittable, almost impossible to dodge, or add about 10 to average STUN damage, any of which is a huge advantage.

 

But, if I require your cap include all CSL’s, we get a character with 13 OCV, 13 DCV and 12 DC’s, and no CSL’s. One with 6 CSL’s gets a max of 7 OCV, 7 DCV and 9 DC’s. He can match the first character in one area only at the cost of being far behind him in the other two. That doesn’t work well either.

 

We could assign his CSL’s – he must fit within the caps with a typical assignment of CSL’s, so maybe he can have 11 OCV, 11 DCV, 11 DC’s and 6 CSL’s – if he assigns them equally, he matches the “no CSL, all at max” character. But he can sacrifice some OCV and damage to be very hard to hit, or pump his DC’s up to 14 when he has an easier target, or Dodge extremely effectively.

 

Probably, the answer is that the high CSL character should be a bit below campaign max with all CSL’s assigned more or less evenly, but capable of exceeding campaign max in one area if he suffers in others. Finding the exact balance isn’t a science. A reasonable starting point might be 1.5 CSL's equating to 1 OCV, DCV or .5 DC's. A 2:1 ratio makes just buying max in everything the better option, and a 1:1 ratio means CSL's are the clear best approach. Somewhere in between lies a more reasonable balance, I expect.

 

Or maybe you shouldn’t be allowed to buy everything at the campaign max – too often, “maximum” simply becomes “default” and all the characters look pretty much the same. Maybe the benchmark is that an “average” character has 9 OCV, 9 DCV, 10 DC’s and 4 CSL’s. You want more DC’s, or a higher OCV? You need to be below average somewhere else. Speed is the other stat that commonly gets factored in. One poster commented in the past on their game rule, which set a maximum for the sum of SPD and DC. Their game included, as I recall, a 4 SPD Brick with a 15 DC attack and a 9 SPD martial artist with 9 DC attacks (one of whom wasn’t quite at the cap). Wouldn’t work in every game, but it clearly worked for them. A lot of games also look at defenses and DCV as tradeoffs.

 

Or the maxima are simply set high enough that characters can't afford to max out every area. If max OCV and DCV are 13, and max DC's are 12, it costs 160 points to bump up both CV's and 60 points for an attack. If the characters have 400 points to spend, that leaves 240 available. If they only have 200 points, they're much less likely to max out OCV, DCV and damage, since 40 points for other abilities won't leave much for defenses and other abilities.

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

@Hyper-Man and Hugh Neilson

I thank you both for feedback - you were a great help - I can't rep you but if I could, I would

 

The Justice League characters provide very nice ideas as "how-to-do" many, many things. I will analyze them all - right now it gives a very nice idea about how to work with points.

 

The bell curve and how rolls go with probability is well known to me because of my experience with GURPS, which also works on 3d6s.

 

The info about CSLs is invaluable - the fact that it isn't science is both helpful and not - for a person new to the system, they are a bit like dark magic - you know what it is, but you don't have a clear idea what it can do. Hughs post helped to clear that for me. On the other hand - it's a good thing that they work like they do - if it was a matter of science and math, we would end up with something too similar to how GURPS combat works, where, after about a years experience with the system I made an interesting character as an antagonist for the PCs and I already knew when and how he will die, like "probably not until turn 5, but may die a bit sooner (sheer luck), will be dead for sure in turn 7, until that time, he will probably injure (...)" blah blah. That's why I like them, even if I don't actually know "how much is enough".

[sobran]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Martial Maneuvers definitely have break points at which they tend to start showing diminishing returns. In most cases you can pick one maneuever from each category and call it good. A throw, passing strike, defensive strike, martial dodge and block, ect. After that, having a few CSLs will let you emulate virtually any maneuver you want. However, if you have Hero System Martial Arts, you can create some really interesting conditional maneuevers. "This follows that."

 

Generally, the more maneuevers I have on a character, the less CSLs and more raw CV I tend to have. That's just a personal choice though, to keep things moving quickly.

 

As for campaign averages, that can be a bit tricky, as you've found. What I started doing, particularly with conversions, is this: get the characters mostly created and look at what "tier" the characters fall under, either in point totals or just judging by where they line up with the caps. Then just make an arbitrary decision. "Well, they seem to fall under this tier, which has a suggested CV of 7-13. I'm going to call the average 10 and cap it at 13." Then I take a look at the characters again with this in mind and see what changes, if any, I would like made.

 

The other thing to keep in mind is whether you are creating all opponents yourself or if you will be pulling NPCs from generics in various books. If you know that you will make the average city guard just like the one in Fantasy Hero but with some gun skills and a couple CSLs, it makes it a lot easier. You can compare relative CVs to see how they should compare to an average guard, cop, ect. If this generic individual puts their one CSL in OCV, sets, braces, and fires, how likely should he be to tag this character?

 

If your estimate is off and you realize it in play, you can easily bump up CV a point or two for free. Alternatively, if you're creating all NPCs yourself it is even more arbitrary. You can call that guard elite and remember to bump the next ones down. TPK is really hard in the Hero Setting. You have to messs up pretty bad to have one. Knocked out and captured is somewhat easier...

 

Ps: typing on a phone forgive the typoes

[Thane]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

Well I am certain that I will create NPCs by myself. It takes me an average of about 10 game sessions in a system to be able to create NPCs in my head and only write down those important. As HERO has a huge ammount of internal consistency (1d / 5 points really makes this quite easy), I think it will be easier to do it. Even now, knowing the averages, I am almost able to do it for simple NPCs with no powers.

I think using precreated NPCs would be counterproductive due to a large ammount (18) of unique races which vary significantly from each other. A young guard of one race can easily be labled a "heroic character" by virtue of his racial traits (can lift an average human with a single hand easily, average specimen is 11' 5" / 3,5m high, fly, extra limb - very flexible tail etc.), while another could be labled a "truly exceptional normal" compared to people (faster, innate psionic abilities). Humans are not really on the average line in this setting - there are many (13 out of 18) races which are much more powerful than humans, but have either no knack for technology (like the speedy "elf-like" race who still shoots people with bows because they don't believe in guns) or no magic sensitivity (strong half-giant-like race) or just can't breed fast enough to matter. But humans are below average - I think that's the standard in 90% of fantasy or fantasy-like settings. So "your average city guard" would vary greatly in power because of race. But I may look into the books as well (maybe I will adapt some things) when I will have the chance to buy them.

As for now, I'll probably spend my money on Hero Designer, so the NPCs will be hand-made ;-)

[sobran]

Re: Few questions about point costs

 

I didn't really think about the fact that you're converting an existing setting that you already have firmly established in your mind. Given that, having all NPCs created by hand does seem to be the obvious choice. Hero Designer is definitely worth the money. I balked at first when I realized it's only a contract, but when my first contract was up I purchased another without a second thought. Best Hero money I've spent.

 

The fact that you have so many races in this setting reminds me of a technique I came up with for a Star Hero campaign I was sadly never able to run. I have since used it whenever applicable. If I am designing an NPC that is intended to be generic in nature, I realized I can essentially make one sheet represent many characters. The reason being that you aren't creating an opponent to be a certain "level", and they aren't players, so the points simply don't matter.

 

It's easier to explain with an example.

 

Let's say you are creating an example of the race called the Thuomandir, humanoid reptiles, known as much for the innate psionic abilities as they are for their mercantile prowess. In Hero Designer, I would stat them up exactly as I expect an average member of their race to be. Then, Hero Designer allows you to add lists in the Skills tab. So I could create one list containing the skills a Thuomandir merchant has, another list that their front-line soldiers have, and a third that their widespread diplomats possess, just to cover all the basic types. Hero Designer throws a warning at you if you try to purchase the same skill twice, but it will still let you, in case you want two "packages" to have the same skill at different levels, as might be the case with the Persuasion skill. While the merchant is good, the diplomat is likely excellent.

 

Similarly, let's say that most Thuomandir develop telekinetic abilities and they use to great effect in combat. However, a rare few develop no TK, but develop powerful psychic abilities instead. These individuals are trained to be espionage agents or special forces, using their abilities to become invisible, create mental illusions, ect. Since, again, the points don't matter, you can create a Multipower for each. As long as you don't become confused and start mixing and matching during play, it doesn't really matter that it is more like a template than an actual character.

 

This technique has also come in handy if I do want to take the time to actually stat out an important NPC. Open the sheet, delete the irrelevant lists, tweak stats and add powers as necessary, and resave.

 

Creating NPCs or tweaking from a sheet or template you have handy is really easy in the Hero System. You might find that you are able to do that a little faster in this system than you'd expect, simply because of the granularity. It's really easy to name an arbitrary Dexterity number or Acrobatics skill for an NPC you didn't expect your characters to suddenly challenge to a contest because it doesn't directly affect defenses or anything else.