Figured skills -- why?

[LouGoncey]

I just hooked up with HERO 3 years ago (not counting an ESPIONAGE campaign I ran when I was 12),  So I did not witness any of the debates when the system changed over from 5th to 6th edition.

 

Figured characteristics where jettisoned, but figured skills (those based on 9+CHAR/5) still exist.  Why not have the pricing a uniform 1 point familiarity, 2 point prof. and 3 point 11-?

 

Just curious for the reasons -- don't want to start any unfriendliness or anything.

[Hyper-Man]

I think it would have been going too far.

 

Example:

Since DEX no longer affects Combat Value or Speed it is only left with Initiative order and DEX rolls. 

 

Would it make sense for a high DEX character to have a DEX roll higher than their base Acrobatics Roll?

[LouGoncey]

This is me just assuming "devil's advocate" here...

 

You design the character with the freedom you want to have.  If you want a character to be Dex oriented, you give him high Dex, high CVs, high DEX skills, whatever.

 

If you are designing Groo, you give him low DEX, but high CSLs with Swords.

[Christopher R Taylor]

It would be odd for Hero to continue moving in the opposite vector of every other game on the market.  I mean D&D finally started connecting skills and secondary stats to primary ones (saving throws, to hit, etc), something Hero has been doing since 1980.  And now Hero is moving away from that, it seems silly to do it even more.

[Hyper-Man]

This is me just assuming "devil's advocate" here...

 

You design the character with the freedom you want to have.  If you want a character to be Dex oriented, you give him high Dex, high CVs, high DEX skills, whatever.

 

If you are designing Groo, you give him low DEX, but high CSLs with Swords.

 

OCV and DCV are already divorced from DEX in 6e.  I can make an Olympic level gymnast who is average in a fight by giving him a 20 DEX and a 3 OCV & DCV.  Non-combat stuff doesn't make sense (to me at least) to go any further. To do so seems too much like GURPS.

[bigbywolfe]

A large part of why Figured Characteristics were done away with was that they were super unbalanced, you got way more utility than you paid for.  Skills being based on Characteristics don't seem nearly as unbalancing to me, particularly INT based skills which are 90% of the reason you would adjust INT at all (PER being the other, though some think it should have been separated as well).

[LouGoncey]

Thank you for the responses. Just wanted to hear from some of the HERO 'gurus' on the forums.

 

I have collected between 3rd all the way up to 6th edition and I cannot choose which one is the better version of the system.

[Tasha]

I just hooked up with HERO 3 years ago (not counting an ESPIONAGE campaign I ran when I was 12),  So I did not witness any of the debates when the system changed over from 5th to 6th edition.

 

Figured characteristics where jettisoned, but figured skills (those based on 9+CHAR/5) still exist.  Why not have the pricing a uniform 1 point familiarity, 2 point prof. and 3 point 11-?

 

Just curious for the reasons -- don't want to start any unfriendliness or anything.

It would have negated part of the need for Dex and Int as a statistic. Also it would have inflated Character cost by a LOT. On top of that I don't think anyone sees Characterstics giving better skill rolls as something inherently unfair.

 

Usually rules conflicts come from the combat side of things. Which is why giving Melee free points in figured characterstics were seen as a bad thing. Also because it wasn't something that benefitted all combat archtypes.

[Lucius]

I suspect the real answer is, "they just didn't think of it." If not that, then what Hyper-Man says:

 

I think it would have been going too far.

 

Example:

Since DEX no longer affects Combat Value or Speed it is only left with Initiative order and DEX rolls. 

 

Would it make sense for a high DEX character to have a DEX roll higher than their base Acrobatics Roll?

 

I'll answer that question: Yes, it might make sense for a high DEX character to have a DEX roll higher than their base Acrobatics roll.

 

And I'll elaborate: it would certainly make more sense than for a high DEX character - that is, a character who presumably has a good reaction time, sense of balance, and physical coordination - to get absolutely no advantage in combat whatsoever over a lower DEX character. That makes NO sense.

 

 

It would be odd for Hero to continue moving in the opposite vector of every other game on the market.  I mean D&D finally started connecting skills and secondary stats to primary ones (saving throws, to hit, etc), something Hero has been doing since 1980.  And now Hero is moving away from that, it seems silly to do it even more.

 

First, I'll point out that as long ago as 1st edition AD&D, there were "secondary stats" influenced by "primary stats." The effect of DEX on Armor Class and CON on Hit Points for example.

 

A large part of why Figured Characteristics were done away with was that they were super unbalanced, you got way more utility than you paid for.  Skills being based on Characteristics don't seem nearly as unbalancing to me, particularly INT based skills which are 90% of the reason you would adjust INT at all (PER being the other, though some think it should have been separated as well).

 

Yes, Figured Characteristics were unbalanced and needed to change. The imbalance could have been corrected without abolishing them; I'm not saying it was the wrong choice, but it was far from the ONLY choice.

 

It would have negated part of the need for Dex and Int as a statistic.

 

I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing. One of the complaints I hear about HERO is that it has too many Characteristics.

 

And I just realized I don't really have time for everything I wanted to say here....I'll be back, if I decide it's worth getting into.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says I need to get ready for a night out with friends.

[mhd]

I'm all for unified systems, but a certain point you'd be doing things for rather dogmatic reasons. Characteristics and skills seem related enough. To be fair, so does combat ability and some characteristics, but there we can argue endlessly about how much something should factor in and how this will affect balance -- and you'll get all the usual problems with dex as god characteristics or the ninjasaurus conundrum. So divorcing combat from the core char set seems a good idea, but removing all connections throughout the game seems like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

 

I would say that they figure in a bit too high, though. But that's mostly due to the limited spread of skill difficulties and thus skill ratings.

[WistfulD]

I'm all for unified systems, but a certain point you'd be doing things for rather dogmatic reasons. Characteristics and skills seem related enough. To be fair, so does combat ability and some characteristics,

Yes, but it's easy enough to reproduce that by (for instance) buying both the now cheaper DEX and also high ocv and dcv. There are exceptions (olympic gymnist--high dex, likely average ocv) that show how they don't inherently go together.

 

Taking the logic og no figured stats, why have stats at all? Why not buy inititative, stun resilience, perception, lifting ability, and everything else completely piecemeal? It's certainly a valid option.

[bigbywolfe]

 

Yes, Figured Characteristics were unbalanced and needed to change. The imbalance could have been corrected without abolishing them; I'm not saying it was the wrong choice, but it was far from the ONLY choice.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says I need to get ready for a night out with friends.

Nothing in my post even remotely implied it was the ONLY choice.  Explaining why you think a course of action was taken is not the same as declaring it was the only course of action possible.

[Lucius]

Nothing in my post even remotely implied it was the ONLY choice.  Explaining why you think a course of action was taken is not the same as declaring it was the only course of action possible.

 

No offense, I hope. I may still be a little sensitive on the subject; at the time I did think it was the wrong choice.

 

Now I think it was either too far, or not far enough.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary argues both sides.

[bigbywolfe]

No offense, I hope. I may still be a little sensitive on the subject; at the time I did think it was the wrong choice.

 

Now I think it was either too far, or not far enough.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary argues both sides.

I was also originally for keeping Figured Characteristics and just "balancing" them.  I was also for keeping COM and just expanding its function.  I was afraid they were throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  I have since changed my mind.

[mhd]

Taking the logic og no figured stats, why have stats at all? Why not buy inititative, stun resilience, perception, lifting ability, and everything else completely piecemeal? It's certainly a valid option.

Sure, and there are games that do that. And if you've got a whole lot of different characteristics, you're coming pretty close to that, too, as then everything just comes down to a more narrow skill category bonus. And some parts would just be general advantages -- superheroic strength really is mostly about lifting ability already.

 

I could certainly live with that, but that would probably require even more de-figuring and removes a neat RPG shorthand that a lot of people got used to.

[LouGoncey]

_{Again thanks for the response. I am leaning towards just using 4th and taking the Change Enviroment Power Description from 5th and begin running with that.  No experienced players in my group -- we are all basically newbs.}