Bell curve spread?

[BNakagawa]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Barrier is the new killing attack, as far as system arguments go, imo

 

$0.02

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I seem to be in the minority position that the removal of Figured Characteristics was not only long overdue, but results in a better game mechanically.

 

But, of course, I railed against (and of course EXPLOITED) the broken mathematical recursions way back when I first discovered and adopted the HERO System 21 something years ago. I always considered it to be the system's one serious flaw. So...no big surprise that I approve of the "fix".

 

Nope, you're good. I'm the minority view in the I like them and prefer them. Still love COM also but the battle is long lost.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Barrier is the new killing attack, as far as system arguments go, imo

 

$0.02

 

I see Barrier as easily abused as opposed to inherently flawed. I am not convinced that the new way of doing KAs is perfect but it certainly no longer causes the problems that the old version did, which is why it is generating less column inches.

 

This is great. We are having a meta-discussion

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Nope' date=' you're good. I'm the minority view in the I like them and prefer them. Still love COM also but the battle is long lost.[/quote']

 

Do we actually need characteristics, I mean...

 

**unsuccessfully ducks Killer Shrike's smack**

 

Alright, I definitely deserved that​ one.

[L. Marcus]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Sowing dissent, are we?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Sowing dissent' date=' are we?[/quote']

 

 

I have a whole load of people gathered in one place to do that. It is an OlFactory.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I think some of the system arguments between 5e and 6e have faded because many 5e proponents either no longer post, or no longer comment on such threads.

 

The pricing of DEX sees some discussion, as does the pricing of skill levels (combat and others).

 

Damage adding sees some discussion, particularly with the "no doubling cap, but wait, let's reimpose the doubling cap" issue.

 

It seems like the old system micro criticisms faded a lot with the concern over the future of the system as a whole.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Do we actually need characteristics, I mean...

 

**unsuccessfully ducks Killer Shrike's smack**

 

Alright, I definitely deserved that​ one.

 

Yep but I foolishly gave you the straight man's line.

[Escafarc]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

If you going to start an argument make sure you make an appointment at the clinic.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsxVzhvQ02s&feature=related

[RDU Neil]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I could start an argument about Killing Attacks right now if you like, just for old times sakes.

 

 

What?

 

 

Razzin' frazin' killin'attacks...

 

Now THAT is what I've missed on these boards. Yes!

[RDU Neil]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Look! RDU Neil is back!!

 

I had forgotten we had the discussions that lead to your sig:

 

Axioms: The sacrosanct core assumptions of the game.

Mechanics: The basic functional building blocks derived from the axioms.

Game Rules: The specific and variable application of Mechanics that define the play of the game.

Play Experience: The resulting behaviors of play and shared imaginary event unique to each group.

 

Hey, Doc! Glad to see you are still representing from across the pond!

[RDU Neil]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I see Barrier as easily abused as opposed to inherently flawed. I am not convinced that the new way of doing KAs is perfect but it certainly no longer causes the problems that the old version did, which is why it is generating less column inches.

 

This is great. We are having a meta-discussion

 

Ah... my work is done here. See you all in a couple of years!

[RDU Neil]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I think some of the system arguments between 5e and 6e have faded because many 5e proponents either no longer post, or no longer comment on such threads.

 

The pricing of DEX sees some discussion, as does the pricing of skill levels (combat and others).

 

Damage adding sees some discussion, particularly with the "no doubling cap, but wait, let's reimpose the doubling cap" issue.

 

It seems like the old system micro criticisms faded a lot with the concern over the future of the system as a whole.

 

I don't know from "doubling cap" issues... but then, I was a 4thEd proponent still, when I left... never did get behind 5th fully.

 

I can see how difficult it could be to continue to publish in this harsh economomy and digital takeover of media. I worked for 19 plus years in the book industry... and now am somewhere very different after running the unemployment hell-race for a year or so. Impressed that Hero is still here at all, really.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I don't know from "doubling cap" issues... but then, I was a 4thEd proponent still, when I left... never did get behind 5th fully.

 

I can see how difficult it could be to continue to publish in this harsh economomy and digital takeover of media. I worked for 19 plus years in the book industry... and now am somewhere very different after running the unemployment hell-race for a year or so. Impressed that Hero is still here at all, really.

 

They, and by extension us, are too ornery to just disappear.

It could be the other way around.

 

As to the arguments/discussions I personally found them needlessly hostile and needlessly needless. I don't get to play hero much anymore save for on HERO Central and character building for fun haven't had an issue with 6th's rules I like the new VPP rules and I admit I like the no figured characteristics just fine in practice...also I've added COM to my 6ed Hero Designer template and so I get the best of all worlds

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I don't think Killing Attacks were nerfed...the 1D3 stun multiple actually puts them in line with Normal Damage attacks as to how much stun damage they can cause at maximum.

 

Figured Characteristics and COM on the other hand, I like and don't want them decoupled (or removed in the case of COM). One of the primary reasons I haven't upgraded to 6th fully. I never had a problem with the 5th edition (even before Revised) so I see no reason to convert my campaigns over.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

Ah... my work is done here. See you all in a couple of years!

 

 

Nooo...come back! The bar tab!

[Christopher]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I don't think Killing Attacks were nerfed...the 1D3 stun multiple actually puts them in line with Normal Damage attacks as to how much stun damage they can cause at maximum.

Who said anythign about nerf? They were corrected to do what their name suggets: Killing.

Afaik 5E thier Stun Multiple was 1d6-1 (min 1). Wich would mean they could do five times their body in STUN (hence the Stun Roulette).

Reducing that to 1d3 puts their max on the same level as a same DC blast, but thier average is lower.

[Lucius]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I said nerfed.

 

By which I mean "made less powerful" not "made useless" or "made to be weaker than appropriate."

 

which is my understanding of the meaning of the word "nerfed."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wonders what's the opposite of nerf

[Enforcer84]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I said nerfed.

 

By which I mean "made less powerful" not "made useless" or "made to be weaker than appropriate."

 

which is my understanding of the meaning of the word "nerfed."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wonders what's the opposite of nerf

 

Fren

[Enforcer84]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I said nerfed.

 

By which I mean "made less powerful" not "made useless" or "made to be weaker than appropriate."

 

which is my understanding of the meaning of the word "nerfed."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wonders what's the opposite of nerf

 

Fren

And honestly I'd think the Palindromedary would get that.

[Christopher]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I said nerfed.

 

By which I mean "made less powerful" not "made useless" or "made to be weaker than appropriate."

 

which is my understanding of the meaning of the word "nerfed."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wonders what's the opposite of nerf

According to Wikipedia it's a buff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerf_%28video_gaming%29

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

The link you provide aggrees with Lucius. "Reduces effectiveness" does not equal made useless...

[Christopher]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

The link you provide aggrees with Lucius. "Reduces effectiveness" does not equal made useless...

Indeed. And I have show that I have read up on it

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I don't think Killing Attacks were nerfed...the 1D3 stun multiple actually puts them in line with Normal Damage attacks as to how much stun damage they can cause at maximum.

 

They now have the same maximum, a much lower average and much greater volatility. If we make the stun multiple 2d6-9, with a minimum of 1, the maximum would still match a normal attack. I would suggest, however, they were even more nerfed. The extent to which a KA is nerfed is dependent on resistant defenses in the campaign. In a Supers game, with a 12 DC expected attack, expected rDEF of 15 or so, and expected defenses of 20 - 25, nerfs a KA. It will occasionally slip a BOD or two past defenses, and an average roll gets 3 - 8 STUN past defenses. An equal normal attack will pretty much never do BOD, but slips 17 - 22 STUN past defenses. KA not useful. Nerfed.

 

That doesn't mean I disagree with the fix. It means KA's are not useful in four colour games where death is rare. Making killing attacks undesirable in such a game seems perfectly reasonable - their purpose is to kill, and death in this game is expected to be rare.

 

Figured Characteristics and COM on the other hand' date=' I like and don't want them decoupled (or removed in the case of COM). One of the primary reasons I haven't upgraded to 6th fully. I never had a problem with the 5th edition (even before Revised) so I see no reason to convert my campaigns over.[/quote']

 

There were other solutions to Figured, but they were at least as unbalanced as the Stun Lotto. Want them back in 6e? Well, what if we did this:

 

30 STR added +6 PD (6 points), +6 REC (6 points), +15 STUN (7.5 points) and +12 meters leaping (6 points) so 25.5 points worth of Figured. So how about this? Let’s have STR add 4 STUN per 5 STR, so +30 STR adds 30 points worth of figured characteristics. We reprice STR at 2 points, set No Figured as a -1 limitation on STR and we’re done.

 

30 CON added +6 ED (6 points), +6 REC (6 points), +15 STUN (7.5 points) and +60 END (12 points) so 31.5 points worth of Figured. So how about this? Let’s have CON add 2 STUN per 5 CON, so +30 CON adds 30 points worth of figured characteristics. We reprice CON at 2 points, set No Figured as a -1 limitation on CON and we’re done.

 

10 BOD added 10 STUN, so let’s leave it at adding BOD to Stun. So we get 22 STUN at stats of 10 across the board, no biggie. We re-price BOD at +2 BOD for 3 points, and No Fivgured is a -1/2 limitation on BOD. That wasn’t so bad.

 

The uglies…

 

30 DEX adds +3 SPD (30 points), +10 OCV (50 points) and +10 DCV (50 points). WOW! Let’s reprice DEX skill levels to match INT and PRE skill levels, and reprice Lightning Reflexes based on DEX with no figured costing 1 point. That’s still 160 points per +30 DEX. WOW! 150 would be easier to work with, and we normally price defense lower than offense, so let’s reprice DCV at 4 points. DEX costs 5 points, and No Figured on DEX is now a -4 limitation.

 

+30 EGO adds +10 mOCV (30) and +10 mDCV (30), so we reprice EGO to 3 points, and No Figured is a -1 limitation on EGO.

 

Done!

 

Interestingly, with the figured's themselves repriced, we find CON was priced about right in 5e anyway (REC, STUN and END were overpriced), and discover that DEX was the real bargain.

 

We can now include or exclude Figured's as we see fit. If you exclude them, drop the price of the Primaries back (and drop DEX to 1 point since it's overpriced and that should be fixed anyway, but that's a whole 'nother story - if you consider DEX OK as is, maybe reprice OCV and DCV to 6 points each, or reprice OCV to 7 and put DCV at 4, and bump DEX to 6 points, -5 limitation for No Figured)

 

COM is easily added back in, should one wish to do so. Use COM/5 as an equal number of Striking Appearance levels and it even comes with some mechanics.

 

Who said anythign about nerf? They were corrected to do what their name suggets: Killing.

Afaik 5E thier Stun Multiple was 1d6-1 (min 1). Wich would mean they could do five times their body in STUN (hence the Stun Roulette).

Reducing that to 1d3 puts their max on the same level as a same DC blast, but thier average is lower.

 

Their average was already lower. 2.67 x 14 = 37.38 vs 42. The problem was that their volatility gave them better average damage after higher than average defenses. Reducing the SM to 1-3 means you need a 3 Multiple to get the same stun as an average normal attack.

 

I'm OK with that. They average more BOD, and it ignores non-resistant defenses. However, in a Supers game, it relegates the KA to niche power. It's nice against targets/opponents that only take BOD. It's useful if a soft target shows up AND you're OK killing them. Against the typical credible combatant, it's next to useless. But, as noted above, in that setting, it should not be a common or viable combat choice.

 

KA replaces Armor Piercing as the "toss it in the Multi and pull it out on very rare occasions" attack. AP is much more viable as a chief attack form as a +1/4 advantage rather than +1/2.

[JmOz]

Re: Bell curve spread?

 

I found a rules legal way to keep Figured characteristics, and not have it unbalanced in the extreme.

 

First let me say that I always felt (and still do) that they were the balancing factor on Elemental Controls, which you will notice have been replaced with "Unified Power" as a -1/4 lim'

 

So with that being my design philosiphy, I allow characters who thing is basicaly a type of characteristic (Speed, Strength, smarts, what ever) to use the unified power on other characteristics.

 

So the Flash (A speed based character) can buy some of his Dex, Speed, OCV, DCV, etc...with unified Power. It works well for me