Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

[Ostof]

General rules question here. Given that the cost for powers favors defensive powers over offensive powers, and given that the suggested active point distribution for offensive powers vs. defensive powers is 2:1 (e.g., 60 active points for offense and up to 30 active points for all defensive abilities, totalled), why does DEX not follow this pattern?

 

Also, given that it is MUCH cheaper to ramp one's OCV (single weapon or tight group for 1pt or 3pts, etc.) than it is to purchase comparable defenses (cheapest DCV CSL starts at 5pts), how does this make sense given the standards laid out in the rest of the system?

 

Aside from attempting to make things mathematically simple (not generally a concern once you've committed to playing this particular game in the first place), why not have the DEX affect DCV at the standard /3 and have it affect OCV at /5? At least that comes closer to addressing the disparity, and doesn't remove so much benefit that players would no longer feel that 3pts / DEX isn't Good Deal.

 

Thoughts?

[Tasha]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

General rules question here. Given that the cost for powers favors defensive powers over offensive powers, and given that the suggested active point distribution for offensive powers vs. defensive powers is 2:1 (e.g., 60 active points for offense and up to 30 active points for all defensive abilities, totalled), why does DEX not follow this pattern?

 

Also, given that it is MUCH cheaper to ramp one's OCV (single weapon or tight group for 1pt or 3pts, etc.) than it is to purchase comparable defenses (cheapest DCV CSL starts at 5pts), how does this make sense given the standards laid out in the rest of the system?

 

Aside from attempting to make things mathematically simple (not generally a concern once you've committed to playing this particular game in the first place), why not have the DEX affect DCV at the standard /3 and have it affect OCV at /5? At least that comes closer to addressing the disparity, and doesn't remove so much benefit that players would no longer feel that 3pts / DEX isn't Good Deal.

 

Thoughts?

 

It's a simplification since the system has only one quickness stat instead of an Agility (Footwork) and a Dexterity (Stuff done with the hands). It also makes the math easier and kept everything using the same system and costs. BTW you can use 3pt skill levels vs DCV if you are using the weapon/ability that the skill level covers. Also you can take 2 3pt skill levels and add 1 DC to an applicable attack.

 

Also it's a non-issue in 6e where no stat gives free secondary stats. You pay full price for all of your stats from their base. This includes OCV/DCV which start a 3 and cost 5 pts per pip of one or the other. OMCV and DMCV cost 3pts per pip.

[gojira]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

I see what you are saying, and it makes sense, but I think the increase in complexity isn't nearly offset enough by the value of a more granular simulation.

 

Seriously I think the system is baroque enough, and covers far more corner cases than it really needs to. Reasoning like this is why we ended up with a fricken 800+ page rulebook. You can obviously make this a house rule for your own games, and more power to ya. But if anything in my own games I'd like to recombine OCV an DCV into a single CV stat, and just note any CSL on the character sheet.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

snip.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

General rules question here. Given that the cost for powers favors defensive powers over offensive powers, and given that the suggested active point distribution for offensive powers vs. defensive powers is 2:1 (e.g., 60 active points for offense and up to 30 active points for all defensive abilities, totalled), why does DEX not follow this pattern?

 

Also, given that it is MUCH cheaper to ramp one's OCV (single weapon or tight group for 1pt or 3pts, etc.) than it is to purchase comparable defenses (cheapest DCV CSL starts at 5pts), how does this make sense given the standards laid out in the rest of the system?

 

Aside from attempting to make things mathematically simple (not generally a concern once you've committed to playing this particular game in the first place), why not have the DEX affect DCV at the standard /3 and have it affect OCV at /5? At least that comes closer to addressing the disparity, and doesn't remove so much benefit that players would no longer feel that 3pts / DEX isn't Good Deal.

 

Thoughts?

 

Its the difference in the way that the Damage Mechanics work vs the way the Attack (to-hit) mechanics work. They are very different. Attack/Defense cost ratio is 2/1 because of the variability inherent in the attack roll and of how much Stun can be generated during the attack roll. Defenses need to be cheap enough to be able to stack enough Defenses to protect against it. When it comes to the attack mechanics, a few points is a MAJOR shift in advantage. A higher than average DCV makes a character quite difficult to hit, which in general is the best defense possible and thus the reason for the higher cost in Skill Levels (for a DCV only CSL)

 

However as mentioned in a previous post, the 6th Edition has made this question somewhat moot as Combat Value has been decoupled from DEX (and indeed, all secondary characteristics decoupled from their primaries) and are paid for separately, and thus in your game, if you wanted to increase the cost of OCV and/or decrease the cost of DCV, you could do it. I would caution one from doing this until it was sufficiently playtested to determine the balance considerations that are likely to arise from such a change.

[jp42]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

The change in 6e was one of my favorite changes. I really like the fact that OCV and DCV are separate, and that you can then add in things like WFs to represent knowledge of specific weapon types, and then levels to give tightly constrained bonuses in certain situations. It lends a level of granularity that many systems lack.

 

As for the way 5e handled it, there's really a significant difference between the results of a 3d6 roll with a +/- 1 associated with it (might be really important, near the middle of the curve, not so much on either end) versus the rather larger distribution of damage dice, which tends to be more linear.

[Zeropoint]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

I found that in 5e, DEX was still underpriced at 3:1 . . . some players I had immediately recognized it as a "god stat" (Wait, this contributes to Speed and OCV and DCV and dexterity skills and initiative order? Sold!) and bought as much as they were allowed to, whether it fit the character concept or not. 6e's separation is, in my opinion, a big improvement.

[Greywind]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

The argument can also be made by that statement that you should have exercised self-control and stayed with concept.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Mainly because Attacking/Dodging is not the same as Damage/Taking Damage. DCV is not a "defense". And if it were cheaper, you'd probably end up with a game where no one hit anything as everyone would likely double their DCV.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

I found that in 5e' date=' DEX was still underpriced at 3:1 . . . some players I had immediately recognized it as a "god stat" (Wait, this contributes to Speed [i']and[/i] OCV and DCV and dexterity skills and initiative order? Sold!) and bought as much as they were allowed to, whether it fit the character concept or not. 6e's separation is, in my opinion, a big improvement.

 

It actually cost 2 points, considering everyone buys up their Speed to the next rounding, at a minimum. While STR and CON got a lot of focus, DEX was the real bargain stat.

 

The argument can also be made by that statement that you should have exercised self-control and stayed with concept.

 

That argument, in my view, is countered by the argument that there should not be cost advantages to some concepts and cost drawbacks to others. A character who has a high OCV, DCV and SPD because of natural agility should be no more, and no less, expensive than a character with the exact same OCV, DCV and SPD because he is highly trained. The same mechanical result should carry the same character point cost.

[Greywind]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

So you're arguing that cost outweighs concept?

 

I'm saying that if my character's concept is a teenager, let's say a full-on comp geek that doesn't have any interest or motivation to play sports/other physical activity should not have a DEX of 40 for any reason.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

The argument can also be made by that statement that you should have exercised self-control and stayed with concept.

 

This.

[rstehwien]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

The argument can also be made by that statement that you should have exercised self-control and stayed with concept.

 

So you're arguing that cost outweighs concept?

 

I'm saying that if my character's concept is a teenager, let's say a full-on comp geek that doesn't have any interest or motivation to play sports/other physical activity should not have a DEX of 40 for any reason.

I found that people just changed their concepts to take advantage of the cost breaks that figured stats gave you. "That Dex and Str were integral to my character concept because of ... Oh, it saved me a bunch of points!? I never noticed ;)"

 

With some groups I found that slowly this happened to everyone as the arms race of point efficiency infected their thinking. Doesn't happen to all groups but it did with several I was involved in and soured me on Hero for a while (everyone was a martial artist gadgeteer and layers of defenses with different activation rolls because they could shave points... I did so love the look on some of their faces when I ran an adventure that began with them getting captured and their gear taken).

 

The change in 6e was one of my favorite changes. I really like the fact that OCV and DCV are separate' date=' and that you can then add in things like WFs to represent knowledge of specific weapon types, and then levels to give tightly constrained bonuses in certain situations. It lends a level of granularity that many[/quote']

My favorite part of 6e and part of what brought me back to Hero.

 

I found that in 5e' date=' DEX was still underpriced at 3:1 . . . some players I had immediately recognized it as a "god stat" (Wait, this contributes to Speed [i']and[/i] OCV and DCV and dexterity skills and initiative order? Sold!) and bought as much as they were allowed to, whether it fit the character concept or not. 6e's separation is, in my opinion, a big improvement.

Strength was also a good bargin... I saw many strong blasters and wizards for that reason.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

So you're arguing that cost outweighs concept?

 

I'm saying that if my character's concept is a teenager, let's say a full-on comp geek that doesn't have any interest or motivation to play sports/other physical activity should not have a DEX of 40 for any reason.

 

That character should not have the OCV, DCV, and SPD of a character who would have 40 DEX anyway, so it doesn't really make your point.

[Greywind]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Not if you build to concept, no, but if the game limits allow it, "hey, why the f' not?"

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Not if you build to concept' date=' no, but if the game limits allow it, "hey, why the f' not?"[/quote']

2 characters could be built to concept and have the same OCV, DCV, and SPD, but by concept should not have the same DEX. With Figured Characteristics building one character with lower DEX was sometimes prohibitively expensive for equal ability (or even more expensive for less ability). If you truly can't see a problem with that I don't think there's much else to say on the subject.

[Greywind]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Nobody said building to concept was perfect or necessarily fair.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Nobody said building to concept was perfect or necessarily fair.

No, but eliminating figured characteristics puts it that much closer to "fair". It gets rid of a very obvious flaw in the system (unless you think having to sacrifice ability to match concept is a perk, something I've never seen anyone argue).

 

It's funny, I never see people who use the "build to concept" argument post horribly inefficient builds that would have trouble keeping up with a group of characters built on similar points. Strange that.

[Greywind]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Point efficiency isn't all that wonderful except to an accountant.

[Ostof]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Also it's a non-issue in 6e where no stat gives free secondary stats. You pay full price for all of your stats from their base. This includes OCV/DCV which start a 3 and cost 5 pts per pip of one or the other. OMCV and DMCV cost 3pts per pip.

 

Ah, I had not realized that 6E had addressed this issue. My game's been running on 5ER for the past 7 years, and we'd seen no reason to attempt a full blown character (and book) upgrade. Now I see a reason... Thanks for the insight!

[Ostof]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

I see what you are saying' date=' and it makes sense, but I think the increase in complexity isn't nearly offset enough by the value of a more granular simulation. But if anything in my own games I'd like to recombine OCV an DCV into a single CV stat, and just note any CSL on the character sheet.[/quote']

 

That's not a bad idea. Might be a bit tricky to work out through HD, as I am no kind of programmer, but I like the feel of this on the surface. That is, if we don't end up switching to 6E (see previous comments). Thanks for your honesty and for the idea.

[Ostof]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Thank you to everyone who joined in and gave examples and offered illuminations using their own particular brand of light - I've found that I'll be able to use something from pretty much everyone. Thanks!

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

So you're arguing that cost outweighs concept?

 

I am arguing that cost should not vary by concept. There is no reason that two characters whose concept calls for a 6 SPD and a 10 OCV and DCV should pay different costs for those mechanical benefits. Let's consider:

 

Character 1 30 DEX (60 points) and 6 SPD (20 points) spends 80 points.

 

Character 2 is a normal human with exceptional training, so by concept we give him a 12 DEX (6 points), +6 DCV (30 points), 6 SPD (38 points) and +6 OCV (assume 30 more points; there were no "+1 to all OCV" levels). So he pays 104 points, 24 points more, for OCV and DCV that has to be assigned (unlike the natural CV of the agile character), has lower DEX skills (another 20 points to bump DEX skills to the same roll, but only one skill at a time unlike the lower cost character) and moves slower (unless we invest still more points into Lightning Reflexes).

 

In my view, the system should encourage, not punish, playing to concept. It will undoubtedly be the "high DEX speedster" concept player who complains about "Highly Trained Normal Man" being able to afford competitive stats.

 

If we repriced DEX at 10 points, so Highly Agile Man spends 220 points, would that be fair? Now it's the high DEX character who gets to overspend, but he should still build to concept, right?

 

Or we could remove figured characteristics so the cost of 6 SPD, 10 OCV and 10 DCV is 110 points for either character, and the only difference is that High DEX Man pays extra points for his extra DEX. In 6e, the difference will be 36 points for an added 18 DEX. Is that perfect balance? I don't know. Actually, I don't think it is (I think 6e DEX is overpriced). But I do know that, even at 2 points for +1 DEX, 6e is a lot better than requiring the guy who gets less ability overall to spend more character points.

 

I'm saying that if my character's concept is a teenager' date=' let's say a full-on comp geek that doesn't have any interest or motivation to play sports/other physical activity should not have a DEX of 40 for any reason.[/quote']

 

I agree. I'm saying that such a character should be playable, and should not be a second stringer because characters whose concept justifies a 40 DEX will be lower cost and more effective.

 

No, but eliminating figured characteristics puts it that much closer to "fair". It gets rid of a very obvious flaw in the system (unless you think having to sacrifice ability to match concept is a perk, something I've never seen anyone argue).

 

It's funny, I never see people who use the "build to concept" argument post horribly inefficient builds that would have trouble keeping up with a group of characters built on similar points. Strange that.

 

Agreed. [RATS - "must spread rep"] Can someone else who agrees spending 104 points should not get you less than spending 80 points get Bigby for me?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

Build To Concept means "purchasing appropriate abilities and powers" not "I have to pay more because my concept doesn't 'fit' inside the systems inherent point-efficiency flaws".

 

Edit: Repp'd Bigby for your Hugh.

[Ndreare]

Re: Why does DEX affect OCV and DCV equally?

 

The whole advantage hero has over other games IMHO is that game mechanics way equally regardless of excuse. The 6th edition change was perfect for us because in the end FAIR mattered it is the reason for playing hero. If fairness or balance did not matter I would be playing Palladium or Dungeons and Dragons.