Jump to content
MechaniCat

Maxima and Other Things

Recommended Posts

Paying double past a certain threshold discourages (but does not eliminate) certain choices.  I personally like it as having stats in the super-human range can often have pretty large in-game implications.

 

In 5e and earlier a DEX of 23+ made you a combat god with near certainty that you would go first and have a higher base OCV/DCV than anyone you encountered.

 

Similarly a STR of 25+ meant you were doing more damage than anyone else with your muscle-powered weapons while shredding most entangles with ease while your compatriots were stuck.

 

I'm really enjoying the various viewpoints on this discussion.  Several good ideas floating around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Toxxus said:

Paying double past a certain threshold discourages (but does not eliminate) certain choices.  I personally like it as having stats in the super-human range can often have pretty large in-game implications.

 

This is pretty concisely what I meant to say earlier.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Christopher said:

Those rules are called "Normal Characteristics Maxima". Wich is a reliable, robust rule.

 

As opposed to "the GM has to agree".

 

NCM is a rule that has to be communicated before Character creation even begins. It is as fundamental as the Points and Complications. There is no room to be blindsided.

 

Allowing the Optional NCM rule is the GM changing the campaign assumptions. Intentionally.

 

I think right now you argue for the sake of argument, rather then to have a point.

 

I'm not really sure what you think you are communicating.  NCM can be interpreted as "you can have any stats you wish, provided you pay double if they exceed certain numbers, or you put a limitation on them so that you are not subject to the doubled cost".  Or it can be interpreted as "stats over these levels are extremely rare and will have an increased cost, and likely some GM oversight". 

 

Your comments seem to suggest that the GM cannot say "You cannot have a DEX in excess of 25 in this game" if he simply said "NCM rules are in effect", but could restrict your DEX if he had imposed no restrictions on characteristic purchases.  Maybe that is not your intended message, but it is the message that I (and, I think, other posters) are receiving.

 

In a 5e game, I could buy a 30 DEX as +20 DEX, No Figured (40 points) and +2 SPD (20 points) or I could buy +20 DEX (90 points).  What is the difference between these two equally book-legal constructs under NCM which justifies the second costing 50% more than the first?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Btw I’ve never seen a game where there is NCM and not used with campaign limits.  So by looking solely at NCM and saying that it doesn’t work isn’t really fair.

 

Is it fair to use it in conjunction with something that DOES work and then argue that because the conjunction works, all elements of the conjunction must work?

 

Or is it more fair to examine the conjunction and ask which elements are actually doing the work?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

If this post works, how much credit should the palindromedary in the tagline get?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

I am arguing that NCM does not provide any assurance that a high value will be permitted.  I am arguing against your implication that it does, with your DEX 30 character scenario. 

 

NCM is an alternative pricing model, it has absolutely nothing to do with GM acceptance or denial of characters.  I would very much like to know why you feel it does, because that makes no sense to me. 

I answered your question. Please answer mine:

Are you seriously arguing that "the GM has to allowed you exceeding that cap" is more reliable for the players then "NCM"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Toxxus said:

Paying double past a certain threshold discourages (but does not eliminate) certain choices.  I personally like it as having stats in the super-human range can often have pretty large in-game implications.

That is exactly what I mean with "it is a Soft Cap".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Christopher said:

 

Are you seriously arguing that "the GM has to allowed you exceeding that cap" is more reliable for the players then "NCM"?

 

To me, a "Soft Cap" is "characteristics in excess of 20 are legendary to superhuman and extremely rare".  Are you arguing that, if the GM simply invokes NCM, he would be 100% required to accept Lucius' Florist Friar character (note that the two are one character, as the 40 STR Monk is a DNPC/follower).

 

I do not agree with your implicit assertion.  You seem to suggest that, by doubling the cost through NCM, the GM has abdicated his ability to restrict the level of any characteristic, but he could, and would, do so arbitrarily to crush a great character concept.

 

By the way, I am pretty sure you have not answered my question from above, so I will repeat it:

 

What is your concept that absolutely requires a 30 DEX?  To me, 30 DEX (and the attendant 10 OCV and DCV) is a mechanic, not a concept.  A concept would be "the most agile person in all the land", which would be achieved with a 25 DEX (for example) if no one else in the campaign has more than 24 DEX.

 

I will suggest that the better approach, regardless of whether NCM is in play, would be to speak to the GM about this concept, establish the maximum DEX allowable in the campaign, and either build "The Fastest Man Alive", or not.

 

I suspect that, if your 30 DEX character is allowed, and another player independently designed a 33 DEX, 5 SPD character to his own brilliant concept, you would not be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Christopher said:

Are you seriously arguing that "the GM has to allowed you exceeding that cap" is more reliable for the players then "NCM"?

Exceeding what cap?  You're not stating your position coherently.  Please correct this. 

 

Do you mean exceeding 20?  If I hear a GM say "Alright guys, 100+50 points fantasy heroics, sheets to me by Thursday, characteristics aren't capped at 20" then my first impulse is not to blindly assume that Herocles, Son of Goose, the 35 STR warrior will be accepted with no questions asked.  I would have reasonable doubts as to if the GM would be onboard with that.  The statement "20 is not a cap" does not imply "there is no cap". 

The exact same thing applies if the GM had said "Alright guys, 100+50 points fantasy heroics, sheets to me by Thursday, we're using NCM".  I would still assume that the GM had limits he would apply even if he didn't have an explicit system of caps. 

In either case, if I wanted to know "Can I have 35 STR?" my response would not be to say "Oh, NCM, I sure can!", it would be to ask the GM.  Because neither GM statement has actually established the upper bounds. 

So if that's the cap you mean, my answer is no, both are equally unreliable and neither should be taken as assurance that a character with characteristics significantly above 30 will be accepted. 

If you meant some other cap, then specify the thing you're talking about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

Exceeding what cap?  You're not stating your position coherently.  Please correct this. 

To my understanding you are arguing in favor of Hughs idea.

If you do not know what Idea you argue in favor off, please specify it.

 

5 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Are you arguing that, if the GM simply invokes NCM, he would be 100% required to accept Lucius' Florist Friar character (note that the two are one character, as the 40 STR Monk is a DNPC/follower).  

No.

And I demand a quote of what sentence got you that idea. Because I am seriously tired of defending something I never said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Are you arguing that, if the GM simply invokes NCM, he would be 100% required to accept Lucius' Florist Friar character (note that the two are one character, as the 40 STR Monk is a DNPC/follower).

 

6 hours ago, Christopher said:

No.

And I demand a quote of what sentence got you that idea. Because I am seriously tired of defending something I never said.

 

First off, I am unclear what you believe gives you the right to "demand" anything.  However, I will answer your "demand", with the expectation you will reciprocate below.  The exchange that suggested to me that, once the GM says "NCM rules apply", he would be required to accept the Florist Friars was:

 

Lucius asking you:

 

On 1/27/2019 at 7:33 AM, Lucius said:

 

In what way does Normal Characteristic Maxima give you "planning security?"

 

 

You replied with:

 

On 1/27/2019 at 9:01 PM, Christopher said:

I want a Character with 30 DEX when normally 20 is allowed

 

NCM: I can get a Chracter with 30 DEX by paying more.

 

Hughs Idea: I write up a Character with 30 DEX. This ability was a core idea of my build. The GM says no. So now my idea is *bleeped*

 

And that is how NCM gave me planning security.

 

As I read that, you are saying that you are 100% certain you can have that 30 DEX provided you pay the NCM cost.  Why would Lucius be entitled to anything less than 100% certainty that his Florist Friar build, which is just as book-legal under the NCM rules, would not be just as certain of being acceptable in the game?

 

And that is how your statements lead to my interpretation.  The only other interpretation I can see is that you get planning security, but no one else, including Lucius, does.

 

NCM does not really set campaign norms.  You could show up on Game Night with your 30 DEX character and discover another player with Harvey Halfling, who has a 20 DEX (30 points), 5 SPD (+30 points) and +15 DEX, no Figured (+30 points).  He followed the NCM rules as written.  You paid 90 points to have a 30 DEX and 4 SPD.  He paid 90 points to have a 35 DEX and 5 SPD.  How happy are you with your "planning security".

 

[BTW, Harvey is an experienced member of Her Majesty's Slingers - halflings out of basic training would have 20 DEX (30 points), 4 SPD (+10 points), and +10 DEX, no Figured (+20 points).  But Harvey is more experienced, so he has higher stats that those lowly grunt privates.  And you.

 

Now, I "demand" you finally answer this question:

 

12 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

What is your concept that absolutely requires a 30 DEX?  To me, 30 DEX (and the attendant 10 OCV and DCV) is a mechanic, not a concept.  A concept would be "the most agile person in all the land", which would be achieved with a 25 DEX (for example) if no one else in the campaign has more than 24 DEX.

 

I left the sentence after the question as context.  It is similar to Harvey the Halfling - I suspect you anticipated your 30 DEX character would be legendary for his agility, not a typical grunt private in a legendary regiment, working alongside a more experienced member of that regiment whose agility far outclasses yours.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

First off, I am unclear what you believe gives you the right to "demand" anything

We can not argue if you keep putting unwanted things into my mouth/keyboard. I thought that was a basis of human communicaiton everyone agreed on?

 

23 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

However, I will answer your "demand", with the expectation you will reciprocate below.  The exchange that suggested to me that, once the GM says "NCM rules apply", he would be required to accept the Florist Friars was

I need willfull missinterpretation to follow your argumentation there.

 

23 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

As I read that, you are saying that you are 100% certain you can have that 30 DEX provided you pay the NCM cost.

Except I do not use any percentange or equivalent language at any point. That is something you made up. And I instantly refuted.

And you keep insiting on none the less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2019 at 5:47 PM, Christopher said:

We can not argue if you keep putting unwanted things into my mouth/keyboard. I thought that was a basis of human communicaiton everyone agreed on?

 

I need willfull missinterpretation to follow your argumentation there.

 

Except I do not use any percentange or equivalent language at any point. That is something you made up. And I instantly refuted.

And you keep insiting on none the less.

 

Still waiting for you to answer the question I have asked several times. 

 

You asked where you said anything that gave the impression you felt NCM meant "the GM must now allow any characteristic that follows the NCM doubling rule".  I did so.  In my view, that was  not an argument,  but a clarification of where I gathered the impression that the GM imposing the NCM rules meant that your b30 DEX, and by extension Lucius' Florist Friar, must be allowed.

 

If you are now saying :"no, I did  not mean he had to allow it", then I am back to not seeing the "planning security" you feel  NCM provides,  but GM approval or denial does not.  If the GM can still deny your 30 DEX,  the carpet can still be yanked out from under your desired character build.

 

It may shock you, but I will state that I do not find you to be the King of Communication Skills.  I also find it increasingly tiresome that you cannot fathom how anyone might actually disagree with you, or even read your words without reading your mind to discern what you actually intended the words you typed to mean, without being disingenuous. 

 

Happy Gaming!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Still waiting for you to answer the question I have asked several times. 

Then repeat it. You always write such walls of text, it is hard to figure out what even your point is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Copied from the last time I asked, two posts ago:

 

Now, I "demand" you finally answer this question:

 

On 1/30/2019 at 6:23 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

What is your concept that absolutely requires a 30 DEX?  To me, 30 DEX (and the attendant 10 OCV and DCV) is a mechanic, not a concept.  A concept would be "the most agile person in all the land", which would be achieved with a 25 DEX (for example) if no one else in the campaign has more than 24 DEX.

 

I'm sorry for your short attention span.  Perhaps if you read the full content of peoples' posts, you might better grasp what they have said.  Similarly, if you explained terms which are unique to you, such as "planning security", perhaps we could understand what you actually mean, and you would not have so many people who frustratingly fail to accurately read the details that exist only in your mind, rather than the literal meaning of the few words you post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2019 at 7:47 PM, Christopher said:

We can not argue if you keep putting unwanted things into my mouth/keyboard. I thought that was a basis of human communicaiton everyone agreed on?

 

 

Nor is there much point to anyone interacting with you at all if you are going to look right at words you actually said and deny having ever said them.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Feed it to a palindromedary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2019 at 6:39 PM, Hugh Neilson said:

What is your concept that absolutely requires a 30 DEX?

While it was largely Hypothetical, a "really desxtrous guy"?

Someone that is so dextrous that I worked it into the backstory?

 

My SOP of design is to make a Character to a concept. Then develop the backstory to fit that concept.

If I have NCM, I can do that.

If we have "maybe the GM will allow it", I can not.

 

On 2/2/2019 at 6:54 PM, Lucius said:

Nor is there much point to anyone interacting with you at all if you are going to look right at words you actually said and deny having ever said them. 

I look at the words I said. And can not find your interpretation actively looking for it.

 

While I have my fair share of issues in communication, therapy got me beyond passively asuming I am that bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Christopher said:

While it was largely Hypothetical, a "really desxtrous guy"?

Someone that is so dextrous that I worked it into the backstory?

 

My SOP of design is to make a Character to a concept. Then develop the backstory to fit that concept.

If I have NCM, I can do that.

If we have "maybe the GM will allow it", I can not.

 

So how do you make the leap fro a "really dextrous guy"" to "has to be a 30 DEX"?  If the next highest DEX in the game is 24, and your character has a 25, he is the most dextrous guy in the game.  Wasn't that the concept?  By contrast, if another  player builds a DEX 32 or 35 character, your character feels considerably less dextrous.

 

I am still at a loss as to how having NCM gives you confidence "GM may allow it" does not, unless the GM is beholden to allow any DEX (or other stat) you pay for under the NCM rules.  What is preventing either GM saying "DEX cannot exceed 25, but since being the Most Agile in all the Land is your concept, I'll allow a 26 DEX", or even "25 is the maximum DEX, but no one else in the game will exceed a 24, so your concept of the most agile guy will be realized"? 

 

Would these approaches not satisfy your concept of "a really dextrous guy"?  If not, why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...