Long time Hero players not liking 6e non-figured characteristics

[Old Man]

Honestly I myself am not thrilled about decoupling, but I see it as the lesser evil for a balance problem that really did need to be solved. The ideal solution, in my arrogant opinion, would have been to cost primary stats appropriately as was done in the OP, and keep the stats coupled. But if you do that then it throws the costing for powers out of whack, and then we'd have had to go blow those up too. Decoupling is certainly less intuitive but in the long run it's the cleaner way to solve the balance issue.

 

I'd like to think that that would be enough to convince any veteran HEROphile, but I think the real way to go is just to get them past character creation and into the actual gaming, where coupling matters not. Have a one-off with preconstructed characters, or convert their old characters for them.

[Derek Hiemforth]

I get the "they fundamentally make sense" argument -- to me, it's the best argument in favor of Figureds -- but there's also a problem even with it. Namely, they fundamentally make sense for certain Special Effects. Granted, the Special Effects they make sense for are probably the large majority of characters (characters with some fundamental similarity to humans). But the split between Special Effects and game mechanics is one of the basic axioms of Hero. We generally accept that -- wherever possible -- game mechanics should not enforce particular Special Effects. In that respect, decoupling Figureds reinforced the "Special Effects and game mechanics are separate" nature of Hero.

[Hugh Neilson]

I know we had a few SETAC discussions on this, and it ultimately came back to a belief that, if Figured's were to be retained, they had to be better balanced against the cost of buying everything separately. So we could either have a system where "Primary with No Figured + Secondary purchased direct = cost of Primary", or "no figured at all". The former required a lot more work with no material benefit since the costs would be the same as the latter. That's the argument that sold me.

 

That said, I am glad to see STUN, REC and END reduced in price. These, in many cases, BECAME the Primaries. Oh, you bought more STUN, END and REC? Why not just buy up CON and STR for a lower price and the benefits of CON/STR added in?How many people have 5e or earlier characters who purchased more STUN, END and REC, rather than more CON?

[Hugh Neilson]

Oh, and how is it fair that such a character spent more points to have less benefits?

[Tasha]

Honestly I myself am not thrilled about decoupling, but I see it as the lesser evil for a balance problem that really did need to be solved. The ideal solution, in my arrogant opinion, would have been to cost primary stats appropriately as was done in the OP, and keep the stats coupled. But if you do that then it throws the costing for powers out of whack, and then we'd have had to go blow those up too. Decoupling is certainly less intuitive but in the long run it's the cleaner way to solve the balance issue.

 

I'd like to think that that would be enough to convince any veteran HEROphile, but I think the real way to go is just to get them past character creation and into the actual gaming, where coupling matters not. Have a one-off with preconstructed characters, or convert their old characters for them.

The biggest problem with that solution is that Strength would have lost the 5pts per D6.

[Lucius]

I get the "they fundamentally make sense" argument -- to me, it's the best argument in favor of Figureds -- but there's also a problem even with it. Namely, they fundamentally make sense for certain Special Effects. Granted, the Special Effects they make sense for are probably the large majority of characters (characters with some fundamental similarity to humans). But the split between Special Effects and game mechanics is one of the basic axioms of Hero. We generally accept that -- wherever possible -- game mechanics should not enforce particular Special Effects. In that respect, decoupling Figureds reinforced the "Special Effects and game mechanics are separate" nature of Hero.

Which is why I picked DEX and CV for my example - admittedly "cherry picking." The logical relation there holds for any special effects that involve violent conflicts played out between finite beings in three dimensional space and advancing in the same temporal direction at a rate of one second per second. At the other extreme, why exactly would ED be based on CON?

 

I'm no longer an advocate really for Figured Characteristics. I'm coming to think that decoupling was not only a welcome solution to a problem that was too long unaddressed, it may really be the best solution.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary plans to carry the idea further when we start discussing 7th edition

[dmjalund]

I get the "they fundamentally make sense" argument -- to me, it's the best argument in favor of Figureds -- but there's also a problem even with it. Namely, they fundamentally make sense for certain Special Effects. Granted, the Special Effects they make sense for are probably the large majority of characters (characters with some fundamental similarity to humans). But the split between Special Effects and game mechanics is one of the basic axioms of Hero. We generally accept that -- wherever possible -- game mechanics should not enforce particular Special Effects. In that respect, decoupling Figureds reinforced the "Special Effects and game mechanics are separate" nature of Hero.

Following this argument, we should decouple Energy Blast from Knockback

[Balabanto]

attributes are secondary' date=' not because they are less important, but because they are dependant on the primary characteristics [/quote'] I think its amusing that this was the take away you felt compelled to comment on. The comment was re: "The inherent relationship between primaries and secondaries, regardless of the accounting arguments, were a major part of the system." The point being I do not agree with this statement, that the mathematical relationship itself was a "major part" of the HERO System, nor do I think that decoupling them was a major change. If things like SPEED, REC, STUN, END were removed from the system that would be a major change. Just changing how much of it a character gets for free is not. As to semantics.... [h=3]sec·ond·ar·y[/h] /ˈsekənˌderē/ [TABLE=class: vk_txt ts] [TR] [TD] Adjective [TABLE=class: ts] [TR] [TD] Coming after, less important than, or resulting from someone or something else that is primary.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

 

 

Well, unfortunately, they were. Here are the major features you have to address between 5th and 6th and what they mean. If your world is thematically driven, you have to figure out what to do about Power Defense and attacks that work vs. Power Defense.

 

Drains became 1 1/2 times as powerful because they all became ranged. Now, any idiot can tell you that 60 does not equal 90. But between 5th and 6th, that's exactly what happened.

 

What it means: This means that unless power defense becomes more common, characteristic drains are one and a half times as effective as they used to be, because these powers now gain range for free against progressively cheaper characteristics. The two big winners were END and REC. Whereas these characteristics used to be problematic to drain, now they're truly hideous, especially END. Most characters don't have more than 50 to 60 END, nor is there a reason for them to ever buy more. Whereas before, you were being drained of about 28 END for 60 points, now you're being drained of a whopping 52. Most characters will be burning stun after just a couple actions. However, Power Defense is difficult to justify and can't be put on every sheet so easily.

 

Stun became half as expensive, while defenses stayed the same. Players began building characters that had lower defenses (around 20) and buckets of stun, because it was more cost-efficient to do so, and you stayed on your feet while your opponent dropped like a stone. The only way to correct this, as near as I can figure, is hard maximums for who can buy how much STUN. In a fantasy game this is less of a problem, but the math remains the same.

 

What it means: It means that attacks vs. Power defense are going to become a lot more common, in order to circumvent the ridiculously high stun totals characters can generate.

 

Growth: Growth in 6th edition works great, except for creatures whose only main ability is the ability to change size. This is a problem because the ability's most basic use should be the ability to change your size. In-between numbers generate absurd amounts of effort and calculation for very little end result. This is frustrating.

 

 

 

 

[CrosshairCollie]

Now to see if I can finally post ...

 

Incoming unpopular opinion.

 

HERO is not balanced. It never has been, and that's intentional.. There is no internal ('the system says no') balance at all, only external ('the GM says no'). Want to spend all your character points on a huge Area of Effect Radius Penetrating Killing Attack? Nothing stopping you, except the guy behind the screen. That's how it was 'balanced' before; you explained your justification for wanting your stats where they were, and the GM ruled if they were too high based on the concept.

 

That said, I suppose the question is, do they just not like it, or is it a dealbreaker? I don't LIKE the loss of Figured Characteristics, but it wouldn't be enough to stop me from playing in a game where they were gone. And as someone mentioned earlier, I believe, you can just set the no-longer-Figured-Characteristics to the appropriate levels based on what their STR, etc. is.

[Tasha]

Now to see if I can finally post ... Incoming unpopular opinion. HERO is not balanced. It never has been' date=' and that's intentional.. There is no internal ('the system says no') balance at all, only external ('the GM says no'). Want to spend all your character points on a huge Area of Effect Radius Penetrating Killing Attack? Nothing stopping you, except the guy behind the screen. That's how it was 'balanced' before; you explained your justification for wanting your stats where they were, and the GM ruled if they were too high based on the concept. That said, I suppose the question is, do they just not like it, or is it a dealbreaker? I don't LIKE the loss of Figured Characteristics, but it wouldn't be enough to stop me from playing in a game where they were gone. And as someone mentioned earlier, I believe, you can just set the no-longer-Figured-Characteristics to the appropriate levels based on what their STR, etc. is.[/quote']

 

Hero isn't inherently balanced due to it being a point based game. There's nothing preventing someone from taking their points and putting them all toward one HUGE Attack. That's why Hero Isn't balanced.

 

The Powers are designed to be balanced against one another point for point. So a 50 Active Point attack should be the same no matter if It's a Blast, Flash,Killing attack, Mental Attack or Adjustment power. There shouldn't feel like there's one attack that's better than another. There ARE attacks that can be better in certain situations and that's ok because those same powers have drawbacks that prevent them from becoming the "Go To" power. (In fact this is why KA Stun Mults were nerfed for Champions in 6e)

 

The Balance Problem behind figured characteristics as they were in 1st -5e is that you recieved too many stats for your points. Which made buying secondary Characteristics a foolish waste of points. So the Point for point balance of the powers wasn't reflected in the Characteristics at all. It made people buy up their Dex, Strength and Constitution to levels that were higher than their Character conceptions really allowed for. It also had the unintended side effect of training players to become min maxers. Because if you didn't Buy your primaries up you were foolishly wasting your points buying secondaries. So Hero became the system for minmaxers because the rule encouraged that behavior.

 

Now that you buy your stats up from the base and no Primary stat gives you "free" secondary Stats, now everything is completely balanced. It's very interesting to see how players build characters now. You don't see Energy Projectors with 20-30 strength as a rule, nor to you see everyone wanting a 23 dex. In fact Dex seems to naturally deflate to values closer to Heroic levels.

 

The worst part of losing Figured Chars was the loss of minimum stats for Stun and End automatically increased. Though again that loss was minimal as most people seemed to buy up pretty much all of their Figureds, which means that that loss is minimal.

 

What players now need to do is understand how combat works and how the stats work in combat so they can buy them up to a point so they aren't one shot wonders. I did some of that work in my essay that is linked in my Signature.

[Greywind]

...what signature?

[Tasha]

...what signature?

I think I got it working, the forum software doesn't like URLs and text in the same siggy.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/forum/hero-games/hero-system-discussion/84106-my-character-building-technique-how-to-build-hero-system-characters

[bigbywolfe]

I get the "they fundamentally make sense" argument -- to me, it's the best argument in favor of Figureds -- but there's also a problem even with it. Namely, they fundamentally make sense for certain Special Effects. Granted, the Special Effects they make sense for are probably the large majority of characters (characters with some fundamental similarity to humans). But the split between Special Effects and game mechanics is one of the basic axioms of Hero. We generally accept that -- wherever possible -- game mechanics should not enforce particular Special Effects. In that respect, decoupling Figureds reinforced the "Special Effects and game mechanics are separate" nature of Hero.

dmjalund, those things are not "coupled", they are part of the same power and that is accounted for in the cost of the power. If you want your Blast to not do Knockback you take a Limitation and it costs less. Your point is not comparing apples to apples and does not flow as a logical conclusion from what Derek and Lucius said.

[bigbywolfe]

Now to see if I can finally post ... Incoming unpopular opinion. HERO is not balanced. It never has been' date=' and that's intentional.. There is no internal ('the system says no') balance at all, only external ('the GM says no'). Want to spend all your character points on a huge Area of Effect Radius Penetrating Killing Attack? Nothing stopping you, except the guy behind the screen. That's how it was 'balanced' before; you explained your justification for wanting your stats where they were, and the GM ruled if they were too high based on the concept. That said, I suppose the question is, do they just not like it, or is it a dealbreaker? I don't LIKE the loss of Figured Characteristics, but it wouldn't be enough to stop me from playing in a game where they were gone. And as someone mentioned earlier, I believe, you can just set the no-longer-Figured-Characteristics to the appropriate levels based on what their STR, etc. is.[/quote']

Bullocks. That's not what is meant by balanced. No one is claiming that 2 characters with X points will be balance just because they have the same number of points. No one is saying a 300 point attack and a 30 point attack should be "balanced" (which is basically what you are arguing against). The whole point is that abilities that cost the same have roughly equivalent utility. That has nothing to do with one character spending all 400 points on attacks and another spending them on skills. It has to do with 2 characters spending 60 (or whatever) points on an attack having roughly equivalent abilities.

 

EDIT: And I would argue that that has been the goal since the beginning, otherwise why have points at all? Why keep adjusting the cost of things from edition to edition? Because they were trying to make a game that wasn't balanced and never would be? That doesn't even make sense.

 

[Old Man]

There's a big difference between combat balance and general game balance. HERO can only really try for the latter given that things like Seduction skill cost points. And on top of that, there's no way there can be a one-size-fits-all points cost scheme that works for every possible type of campaign. For example, STR used to be way too cheap in fantasy campaigns, because it defined how much damage your character could inflict.*

 

But the original figured stats costs were so broken that buying up certain primaries effectively had negative cost. That clearly doesn't fly regardless of campaign. We've gotten by with band-aids like only selling back one figured stat, but that's what they were, band-aids.

 

What's interesting to me is that despite the obvious brokenness of figured characteristics, even I find myself only grudgingly accepting the new system. It's unfamiliar in a lot of ways. I'm used to having a really good grasp of what a given characteristic value means in-game; I've had a hell of a lot of practice with the figured system that now is out the window; I always liked that related characteristics were mathematically joined. Why am I not over the moon about the change? Nostalgia and laziness, at least for me.

 

 

*In 6e it also reduces encumbrance penalties, so now it's waaaaay too cheap.

[The_GeeK]

I like the de-coupling, allows for more flexibility.

e.g. A super-strong character, with normal PD.

Yeah, it could be done under previous versions, but actually required more work. (Selling off figured characteristics (not to mention the limit on how many you could sell back))

 

That said ... Growth, WTF? That was the exact opposite, where things were coupled together that, for many, many character concepts, truly don't make sense.

 

I miss the simplicity of Transfer. Drain + VPP + (optionally) Aid is one heck of a lot more complex than one power.

 

[bigbywolfe]

I like the de-coupling, allows for more flexibility.

e.g. A super-strong character, with normal PD.

Yeah, it could be done under previous versions, but actually required more work. (Selling off figured characteristics (not to mention the limit on how many you could sell back))

 

That said ... Growth, WTF? That was the exact opposite, where things were coupled together that, for many, many character concepts, truly don't make sense.

 

I miss the simplicity of Transfer. Drain + VPP + (optionally) Aid is one heck of a lot more complex than one power.

Why is there a VPP in that equation? Transfer = Drain + Aid as far as I can tell.

While I understand the complaint about Growth I think the changes were an attempt to make it more closely match the benefits and drawbacks of the size chart.

[GhostDancer]

And conversation automatically means "complaining" to you?

More to the point, bemoaning means "complaining" to me. The top of my post was a quote from Killer Shrike, post #29. My intention was to make that clear at the onset, but I'm not great at using this new forum format.

[Derek Hiemforth]

You know, although I think I understand why Steve didn't do this, I do wonder whether some of the angst over the decoupling of Figureds would have been muted by just including a sidebar or something in 6E that pointed out the old formulae, and just noted something like "For characters similar to humans, these might serve as simple value guidelines for some Characteristics, by relating them to the values of some other Characteristics." Sort of a nod to the logic of that configuration for many characters, without keeping the game system forcibly tied to it for all characters...

[Istaran]

attributes are secondary' date=' not because they are less important, but because they are dependant on the primary characteristics [/quote'] I think its amusing that this was the take away you felt compelled to comment on. The comment was re: "The inherent relationship between primaries and secondaries, regardless of the accounting arguments, were a major part of the system." The point being I do not agree with this statement, that the mathematical relationship itself was a "major part" of the HERO System, nor do I think that decoupling them was a major change. If things like SPEED, REC, STUN, END were removed from the system that would be a major change. Just changing how much of it a character gets for free is not. As to semantics.... [h=3]sec·ond·ar·y[/h] /ˈsekənˌderē/ [TABLE=class: vk_txt ts] [TR] [TD] Adjective [TABLE=class: ts] [TR] [TD] Coming after, less important than, or resulting from someone or something else that is primary.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

Well, unfortunately, they were. Here are the major features you have to address between 5th and 6th and what they mean. If your world is thematically driven, you have to figure out what to do about Power Defense and attacks that work vs. Power Defense. Drains became 1 1/2 times as powerful because they all became ranged. Now, any idiot can tell you that 60 does not equal 90. But between 5th and 6th, that's exactly what happened. What it means: This means that unless power defense becomes more common, characteristic drains are one and a half times as effective as they used to be, because these powers now gain range for free against progressively cheaper characteristics. The two big winners were END and REC. Whereas these characteristics used to be problematic to drain, now they're truly hideous, especially END. Most characters don't have more than 50 to 60 END, nor is there a reason for them to ever buy more. Whereas before, you were being drained of about 28 END for 60 points, now you're being drained of a whopping 52. Most characters will be burning stun after just a couple actions. However, Power Defense is difficult to justify and can't be put on every sheet so easily. Stun became half as expensive, while defenses stayed the same. Players began building characters that had lower defenses (around 20) and buckets of stun, because it was more cost-efficient to do so, and you stayed on your feet while your opponent dropped like a stone. The only way to correct this, as near as I can figure, is hard maximums for who can buy how much STUN. In a fantasy game this is less of a problem, but the math remains the same. What it means: It means that attacks vs. Power defense are going to become a lot more common, in order to circumvent the ridiculously high stun totals characters can generate. Growth: Growth in 6th edition works great, except for creatures whose only main ability is the ability to change size. This is a problem because the ability's most basic use should be the ability to change your size. In-between numbers generate absurd amounts of effort and calculation for very little end result. This is frustrating.

 

Regarding Drains, is it really imbalanced though?

Drain v STUN is 10 points to do 1d6 STUN only, OCV v DCV, resisted by power defense.

Mental Attack is 10 points to do 1d6 STUN only, OMCV v DMCV, resisted by mental defense.

Blast (AVAD: Power Defense or Mental Defense) is 10 points to do 1d6 STUN only, OCV v DCV, resisted by the chosen defense.

The only real difference between the Blast and the Drain is how they are recovered. Blast will combine with other typical attacks for REC recovery per Turn (and subject to taking Recoveries), while Drain will be recovered 10 STUN/turn independently from REC.

The drain still seems weaker, at least at this level.

Draining END instead is a little more unclear. As you said, you can quickly get someone burning STUN for END. So at that point your 60 AP power has them taking 3d6 every time they use a 60 AP power. So after two of their phases they've taken the equivalent of one of those above 60 AP powers. Every Turn, they get back 25 END, which is enough to use 4 such powers, so you probably have to reapply regularly.

It -could- get out ahead (though far less likely to stun them), but on the other hand there's a lot of ways to get around it. If they have a no-END attack, for example, possibly built on Charges.

 

If Drain is more powerful, maybe it's simply that it used to be too weak?

On the other hand, Suppress is now a -1/2 instead of half base cost. Otherwise, Suppressing STUN could be kind of out of hand.

 

 

[Istaran]

I also think all the CV's (OCV / DCV / OMCV / DMCV) should have been defaulted to 0 starting. They all resist each other across a base 11- roll anyway; nothing would have changed mechanically and it would have avoided the weirdness of characters with no mental powers having points sunk in OMCV' date=' and would have undercut the current problem with the pricing of CSL's now that OCV and DCV are 5 points each.[/quote']

 

In addition to aspects discussed by others, there is also the fact that HERO uses 1/2 or 0 OCV/DCV as the effect of various situational penalties, and also uses 0 or 3 as DCV for fixed locations. So changing OCV/DCV to baseline at 0 has a meaningful effect. You also can be drained to 0, but not below.

Your idea does seem like it could be reasonable to apply to OMCV and DMCV though.

[Martin2]

This is probably covered already but I missed it?

 

I am not too familiar with the costings for 5th but I think the theory is that you buy X points of Dex and get "free" Y OCV Z DCV. You buy A STR you get "free" B leaping etc.

 

If a 5th player is used to buying 10 dexterity and getting "free" stuff just have a table exactly like 5th but cost it as 6th (which I think is what the first post was on about).

 

So your 5th player can go along the same route as he did before but it cost the same as a 6th.

 

A person who only uses 6th and can do some thing similar and buy back things he does not want or follow the 6th rules.

 

Then nothing has to change rules wise for 6th.

 

I have converted a number of 5th to 6th and they tend to come in at 50 points hgher which makes your "average" 5th 350 being similar to "average" 6th 400.

 

So the 5th gets what they want and a 6th person gets what they want and no need to change points or rules to balance a 6th level game.

 

After character generation the rules are 6th (so no connection between Dex and OCV drains unless it is the specific power).

 

Edit - rereading it has been covered so forget what I said

 

 

[ghost-angel]

I get the "they fundamentally make sense" argument -- to me, it's the best argument in favor of Figureds -- but there's also a problem even with it. Namely, they fundamentally make sense for certain Special Effects. Granted, the Special Effects they make sense for are probably the large majority of characters (characters with some fundamental similarity to humans). But the split between Special Effects and game mechanics is one of the basic axioms of Hero. We generally accept that -- wherever possible -- game mechanics should not enforce particular Special Effects. In that respect, decoupling Figureds reinforced the "Special Effects and game mechanics are separate" nature of Hero.

@dmjalund - you do know Knockback is an OPTIONAL RULE right? Knockback and Blast are 'coupled' - Knockback is an Optional Rule you can implement to simulate the source material (comic books) of having combatants knocked around several meters with nearly every hit.

 

@bigbywolf - actually, no Knockback isn't "part of the power" nor is it accounted for in the cost. It's an Optional Rule, much like Bleeding Rules.

 

Knockback is not part of the base ruleset.

[psyber624]

A couple of comments from me.....

 

1. If the argument is that people are resistant to change then why would you ever allow or support any newer versions of a game system? If your argument is that "gamers are lazy" and don't want change then you are stating that the whole CONCEPT of New Versions is flawed and the entire purpose of revision is to change (and hopefully improve) a system and if the players are "too lazy" to want to adapt to the changes then the new versions will not be successful at all. If you prefer an older version then you are free to play in that, but that doesn't make you lazy, necessarily, it just means that you don't agree with the changes that are made.

 

2. One of the reasons I would argue for the CV's and such to NOT start at 0 is that all the characteristics start at some "base" level which is considered the norm for an "average" human. That is one of the concepts of the game. Not to mention that DCV 3 is the same difficulty as hitting a target hex so your "base" DCV makes you as hard to hit as a stationary object. The same could be argued for the MCV's, even people with no psychic ability would conceivably have some defense against it, and some ability to use psychic powers if they were to obtain them in some fashion (the wide open world of HERO SYSTEM provides MANY ways in which a person could obtain psychic powers without necessarily gaining any ability to use them). In game terms OMCV/DMCV 3 is simply considered the "normal average" baseline just like INT 10 is considered the same. You could definitely set all stats to 0 if you wanted and then require every player to buy them all up from there if you wanted (providing bonus points to compensate for this need) , but since starting stats can be sold back for points this really wouldn't have any net effect on character building. Of course to each their own.

[Greywind]

I am not against change. If I had the means I would look through a copy of 6th and check it for myself.

 

The argument would be against drastic changes (for that reference D&D changing from 3.5 to 4) which is how a lot of people that kind of left the boards saw the jump from 5th to 6th.