Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Killer Shrike

HS 6e is mechanically the best version of the rules; dissenting views welcome

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, SpaceknightFenix said:

That's not that amazing. It's not nearly as ridiculous as 70 strength or 30 dex.

 

True, you won't be the next superman, but a person who can quadruple their aptitude at anything for short bursts would still get tons of media attention.

 

Reporter:  How much can you bench?

Guy:  Hmm, maybe 200?

Reporter:  Can you lift that 700lb barbell?

Guy:  Sure, hold on, ~huff, huff, huff~  RAAAAAAAHHH!

 

Repeat for how fast can you run.

 

How fast can you solve this rubic's cube.

 

And so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, you can only Push abilities that cost END.

 

Second, by the rules, you don't just decide to Push on a whim.  By RAW "The average man — even the best athletes and warriors — can never Push." and "characters can only use Pushing for crucial, heroic, or life-saving actions. Characters, even heroes and PCs, cannot Push whenever they want to just to look impressive."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

 

You might tempt me into accepting Charlize Theron in a catsuit....a la Prometheus...

 

But then I would have had to see Prometheus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before 6th edition, the way to build a character who was a highly skilled combatant without being an Olympic level gymnast was... to not buy them Acrobatics Skill.  ;) 

 

Just kidding (just serious?), but where I was really going with that was, Combat Skill Levels.  

 

I'd have rather seen the CV's either not decoupled from their former parent stats, or to have kept them coupled together within themselves as CV and MCV.  

 

Let me ask another question.  Regardless of edition, if you (the general you, so anyone can answer) were going to run or play in a "Pointless Champions" game with no maximum points, what would you do with OCV and DCV?  

  • Assuming your edition of choice is 6th, would you have kept OCV/DCV at DEX/3?
  • Assuming your edition of choice is not 6th, would you have set them as desired?  

To be honest, I probably would have kept them at their DEX/3 levels, regardless of edition.  If I wanted to separate them I probably would have done so with Skill Levels.  

 

I guess a follow up question: if your edition of choice is 6th: when you're building a character, what is it that leads you to build one CV higher or lower than the other?  Character concept, sure, but what specifically?  And what leads you to buy OCV or DCV rather than Combat Skill Levels, or vice versa?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

 

If people want to argue about build semantics and appropriate characteristics levels and other concretions, while you and I may not find much value in that sort of discussion, and you and I may smile bemusedly at the edge cases and extreme positions taken and think "Hero System GMing 101 techniques wallpaper over this sort of thing", and you and I may prefer to focus on abstractions and higher order considerations...who are you and I to tell the rest of our peers that they are wasting their time on circular arguments of little consequence? It is their time to spend and their privilege to self-determine what to spend it on and to decide what is and is not consequential for themselves. 

 

I don't recall saying it was a waste or time or even that it was of little consequence.

 

I just don't think that HOW to (potentially, as with all Hero stuff) stat things up is particularly rules related. And the (my impression) circularity of the arguments over several pages are funny to me.

Share this post


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

Before 6th edition, the way to build a character who was a highly skilled combatant without being an Olympic level gymnast was... to not buy them Acrobatics Skill.  ;) 

 

Just kidding (just serious?), but where I was really going with that was, Combat Skill Levels.  

 

I'd have rather seen the CV's either not decoupled from their former parent stats, or to have kept them coupled together within themselves as CV and MCV.  

 

Let me ask another question.  Regardless of edition, if you (the general you, so anyone can answer) were going to run or play in a "Pointless Champions" game with no maximum points, what would you do with OCV and DCV?  

  • Assuming your edition of choice is 6th, would you have kept OCV/DCV at DEX/3?
  • Assuming your edition of choice is not 6th, would you have set them as desired?  

To be honest, I probably would have kept them at their DEX/3 levels, regardless of edition.  If I wanted to separate them I probably would have done so with Skill Levels.  

 

I guess a follow up question: if your edition of choice is 6th: when you're building a character, what is it that leads you to build one CV higher or lower than the other?  Character concept, sure, but what specifically?  And what leads you to buy OCV or DCV rather than Combat Skill Levels, or vice versa?  

 

I like the Dex/3 base (and Ego/3 base) as it provides a good initial range of CV based on how generally coordinated and agile somebody is. IMO, obvs.

 

 

Share this post


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

if your edition of choice is 6th, when you're building a character, what is it that leads you to build one CV higher or lower than the other?  Character concept, sure, but what specifically? 

 

Do you mean why would a character have OCV and DCV not equal to one another? Plenty of reasons. For instance, a character that is hard to hit might have a DCV higher than OCV, and a character who wades in and soaks damage might have a lower DCV than OCV. Ability to hit things and ability to avoid getting hit are separate abilities and while they can of course be kept equal to each other if desired, it is nice to have the freedom to set them at different values when that is desired.

 

2 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

And what leads you to buy OCV or DCV rather than Combat Skill Levels, or vice versa?  

 

I think the math indicates that one should buy OCV / DCV as characteristics until NCM (if any) rather than relying on CSL's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TranquiloUno said:

 

I don't recall saying it was a waste or time or even that it was of little consequence.

 

I just don't think that HOW to (potentially, as with all Hero stuff) stat things up is particularly rules related. And the (my impression) circularity of the arguments over several pages are funny to me.

 

"dickering" has a certain petty, time wasting connotation to it...https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dickering

 

image.png.697c056f9c8e287c44f951c1d9295a09.png

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/dicker

 

dicker
VERB North American 
1 Engage in petty argument or bargaining.

‘Sam advised him not to dicker over the extra fee’

 

 

Share this post


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

 

 

 

 

So are you suggesting GL have a 17 DEX and, say, 4 SPD?  That sounds reasonable for an ace test pilot, at or near the top of the field.  Basically, we build Hal Jordan as an experienced air force test pilot, now in the private sector, agent-level character, then we add superpowers.  Sounds good.  We take Ronnie Raymond, high school jock, with maybe 14 DEX and 3 SPD, then add Firestorm powers.  So far, it's all good.

 

Then we toss them into the CU, and their 5 and 6 CVs make them unable to hit other Supers, who are all DEX 23+.  Those other Supers are also SPD 5-7, running rings around GL and Firestorm. 

 

How is it that we are wrong to suggest "all Olympic Gymnasts are identical" in having exceptional DEX, between peak human and perhaps dipping into legendary, but we are also wrong to suggest that "all test pilots and military veterans are not identical" in having high DEX?  Just as I can build a great gymnast with an 8 DEX and skill levels, I can build a great fighter pilot with 8 DEX and skill levels.  And I can build those much more cost-effectively than a pre-6e combat specialist with 8 DEX and combat skill levels.

 

 

 

No. I'm suggesting giving PCs (and NPCs) stats based on the genre, points available, type of game, house rules, Rule of X\other, players (and their characters), and so on.

Just like normal Champions\Hero.

 

If "Dex 17 GL" can't compete with CU (Champions Universe?) characters then...so what?

 

IF we were designing a GL emulation, for use in a CU adjacent setting, THEN I'd think GL would need more points, get more points, and have values closer to the "campaign" values.

IF we were designing a GL emulation, for use in a very street-level and gritty settings, THEN I'd think Dex 18 might be a bit high. But maybe this is a very agile GL.

 

 

So it'll depend. Just like normal Champions\Hero.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Killer Shrike said:

 

"dickering" has a certain petty, time wasting connotation to it...

 

Well since we aren't all playing in each others games...going over if Ben Grimm really has Dex 15 (no 19! No 23!) or what his Speed *is* (because it can't be different in different games!) seems like dickering.

That's never really stopped anybody from talking about stuff on the internet though. :)

 

"You did Superman as a Speed 6 with 65 Strength!??!??!?! UNREALISTIC!!!!"  /flipstable

 

 

To me most of the stat ranges are more about suggested ranges that have been shown to generate "good" results over the years.

We could run an all "normal humans" game where everybody has stats in the 30s and just use that to generate more granularity for whatever reason. So Normal Human 1 has Spd 4 and Normal Human 2 has Spd 6 and we just want to create enough of a delta that "Fast Guy" feels fast and "Normal Guy" feels less0fast

The toolkit approach to Hero suggests that trying to figure exact stats for Ben Grimm is highly campaign dependent and will vary wildly depending on how we want to set things up.

 

I'd say that standard comic reality says that PCs (wait, there are no PCs in comics, shit!) are pretty exceptional AND that they generally exist in a world without direct comparisons.

"Olympic level athlete" could just mean, "He's a Dex build", or it could mean, "It's impossible for him to have  Dex higher than 18 because that's the realistic number for an Olympic athlete!", or things in between.

 

And then it gets weirder when we start to stuff in supers specific terms like, "fast brick", which don't really have anything to do with the source material (never heard Supes or Bats call somebody a, "fast martial brick", for instance).

 

And that's where I think it diverges from which version of the rules is mechanically the best and in to the realm of, "How do YOU want to run THIS game?".

 

Folks are certainly welcome to keep dickering over how to stat specific fictional references. I wouldn't want them to stop.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, and I basically agree with you. BUT if arguing thru the details helps some people frame their positions on 6e (no figured) and pre-6e (figureds), then what's the harm? I don't think they've damaged the thread and discussion continues, and out of that back and forth...spin off conversations have born fruit. 

 

It all seems like fair game to me so far {shrug}

Share this post


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

Sure, and I basically agree with you.

 

Exactly.

 

2 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

...frame their positions on 6e (no figured) and pre-6e (figureds)...

 

 

I think Figureds, as a default, are a better solution. Things scale automatically.

No Figureds removes the default scaling. 

 

Players and GMs are going to adjust the Figureds from defaults. Almost always. To taste\game limits.

 

In sub-6e they'll adjust from scaling defaults that relate to in-game and mechanical capability. 

This seems sensical to me. Base attributes have follow on effects.

 

Nothing prevents direct adjustment of any of the Figureds pre-6e and many effects explicitly do just that (thinking of Large (-2 DCV) and the like from the Beastiary).

 

I think No Figureds could be an APG deal. Alternate\non-default. :)

 

 

2 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

then what's the harm?

 

I don't recall saying it was harmful. 

You're doubting my commitment to Sparkle Motion here? 😕

 

Share this post


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

In the comics, how many characters, proportionately, have agility that is truly legendary to superhuman?

 

All the ones that aren't bulletproof and don't die in the first (second, third...) gunfight, for starters.

 

All the ones who aren't portrayed as significantly less agile than them.

 

Between those two groups, that's most of them.

 

One problem we have is that Marvel, and DC to a lesser extent, have "documented" the capabilities of their characters in a way that's not particularly useful. What specifically makes it not particularly useful is that they don't even follow their own guidelines themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A big problem in this discussion is that the benchmarks used in superheroic games and heroic games aren't really comparable.

 

1e Champions had one set of benchmarks. Espionage (the first heroic level game published) had another. Subsequent heroic games followed the Espionage guidelines.

 

Over the decades, I've whiled away a lot of spare time trying to rationalize the two. Frankly, my conclusion is that it's a waste of time. It's better to use one set of benchmarks in the genre it was designed for, and the other in the genres for which it was intended, and not try to mix the two.

 

The "unified" 5e/6e benchmarks seem to be what is driving a lot of this discussion. Unfortunately they are a compromise between the two sets of benchmarks, and something of a fudge.

 

People will always try to square this particular circle, of course. The "unified" benchmarks actually provide a partial solution. But as we have seen, it doesn't stop people trying to push superheroic characters into categories designed for non-superheroic characters.

 

For me, that exercise is futile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, assault said:

 

 

The "unified" 5e/6e benchmarks seem to be what is driving a lot of this discussion. Unfortunately they are a compromise between the two sets of benchmarks, and something of a fudge.

 

People will always try to square this particular circle, of course. The "unified" benchmarks actually provide a partial solution. But as we have seen, it doesn't stop people trying to push superheroic characters into categories designed for non-superheroic characters.

 

For me, that exercise is futile.

Very cogent observation.  The base mechanics for Hero are sound, it’s just the attemp at making it universal, in one book, rather than a common system with different scales may be the problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

Before 6th edition, the way to build a character who was a highly skilled combatant without being an Olympic level gymnast was... to not buy them Acrobatics Skill.  ;) 

 

Just kidding (just serious?), but where I was really going with that was, Combat Skill Levels. 

 

CSLs are the obvious go-to.  So let's assume we want a Highly Trained Normal Human build where we accept the character will have 20s in all physical stats - peak human normal, but not legendary.  Well, we need CVs of 12 to compete with those 35 DEX Supers in the game, so we'll need +5 skill levels with DCV (25 points) and +5 skill levels with OCV, which do not exist in any edition.  Let's call those 25 points as well, so we spend 50 points.  But the 35 DEX character spent 45, recovered 15 from Speed for a net cost of 30, and has the same CVs, acts faster and has better DEX rolls.

 

OK, my character is NOT a highly trained normal after all - he took a SuperSoldierSerum that made his agility superhuman, because I want to play a competitive character, not Captain Sidekick.

 

DCV skill levels had to be assigned.  DEX worked all the time.  Skill levels must be assigned to specific uses.  OCV does not.  When that Normal wants to Multiple Attack with, say, a thrown weapon and a punch, he only adds OCV to one of those attacks, but the 35 DEX character has OCV that works all the time.

 

CSLs provide flexibility.  When used to simulate "just CV", they never worked right, cost or gameplay.

 

17 hours ago, Chris Goodwin said:

I'd have rather seen the CV's either not decoupled from their former parent stats, or to have kept them coupled together within themselves as CV and MCV. 

 

Why?  Other than "I am used to it because that is the way it has always been"?  I think the comics show Ben Grimm has a much better OCV than DCV, to pick an example from this thread.  Ditto a lot of Blasters in the comics.

 

Why DEX/3, other than "that is the way we have always done it"?  We know too big a difference in OCV/DCV means "never hits" or "never misses", practically, and it is a pretty narrow range.

 

14 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

I'd say that standard comic reality says that PCs (wait, there are no PCs in comics, shit!) are pretty exceptional AND that they generally exist in a world without direct comparisons.

"Olympic level athlete" could just mean, "He's a Dex build", or it could mean, "It's impossible for him to have  Dex higher than 18 because that's the realistic number for an Olympic athlete!", or things in between.

 

 

Most comics feature a range of normal humans and scale up through trained people to other Supers.  Those are benchmarks.  Hydra agents hit the Hulk and the Thing easily, and miss Spider-Man and Captain America.  So shouldn't VIPER agents perform similarly?  The Yancy Street Gang throws tomatoes at Ben Grimm and hits him pretty routinely.  If he has a DEX of 23 and a DCV of 8, what does that make the average OCV of a street tough in the game?  Is that better or worse than a cop?  A soldier?  A Hydra agent?

 

Comparisons are what differentiate the characters.  I doubt any of us would disagree that the ranking of agility is Spidey at the top, then Cap, then the Thing.  So how far above a Hydra agent, a Yancy Street tough or a normal human is the Thing?  We know Cap is further up, and Spidey even higher.

 

11 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

I think Figureds, as a default, are a better solution. Things scale automatically.

No Figureds removes the default scaling.

 

When the defaults are not useful character builds, it doesn't really help.  And only SOME things scale.  I've seen a few Hero novices discover just how bad an idea it was to take a 10 PRE, or even a 10 EGO. 

 

10 hours ago, dmjalund said:

If we no longer consider DEX primarily a combat ability, maybe it shOuld Be moved next to the other not-primarily-combat abilities like INT and PRE

 

Another issue, but I believe DEX, PRE and INT should be aligned in that manner.  Initially, I thought DEX should be 1 point, but I have moved to believing INT and PRE should be 2 points.  Each provides a bonus to a number of skills.  I would suggest that "+1 to all DEX, INT or PRE rolls" should cost 5 points, and scale down when the bonus applies to only a subset and/or to only one roll (e.g. acrobatics or stealth, not both) at a time.  Each provides another bonus.  DEX provides combat order (Lighting Reflexes, then, would cost 5 points for +1 to all combat order, scaling down if restricted), INT provides PER rolls (again, 5 points for +1 to all PER rolls, scale down if limited) and PRE provides PRE attacks (so +1d6 for 5 points, scale down if limited).

 

PRE defense wold move to EGO which would remain 1 point.  +2 PRE DEF for 1 point, +2 EGO rolls for 5 points.

 

10 hours ago, assault said:

A big problem in this discussion is that the benchmarks used in superheroic games and heroic games aren't really comparable.

 

1e Champions had one set of benchmarks. Espionage (the first heroic level game published) had another. Subsequent heroic games followed the Espionage guidelines.

 

The benchmarks are the issue.  However, 1e set benchmarks of 10 DEX, 3 OCV and 2 SPD for normal humans, 15 DEX, 5 OCV/DCV, 3 SPD for agents and 23 DEX, 8 CV, 5 SPD for average Supers.  That set the bar that agents almost never hit.  We then saw DEX move up.  1e we saw 18 DEX Supers, and a top end of 30.  We quickly started seeing 35 DEX martial artists, and Bricks/slow to average Supers moved to 20 - 23.  Then it stayed there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, assault said:

 

All the ones that aren't bulletproof and don't die in the first (second, third...) gunfight, for starters.

 

All the ones who aren't portrayed as significantly less agile than them.

 

 

Put that into Hero terms.  That gunman has a 5 OCV, say (some will be higher).  A 13 DCV means they hit only on a 3.  Maybe not the first, or even third, gunfight but 1 in 216 bullets should find its way home.  They don't, so "just DCV" is not the explanation.

 

And they can have DCV without having high DEX.  Daredevil and Batman survive a lot of gunfights, probably with higher OCV opponents than 5.  Do they have 42-45 DEX to get a 14-15 DCV so a 7 OCV gunman only hits on a 3?

 

Two approaches are taken, in my experience.  One is a combat luck model, simulating them avoiding the worst effects of those attacks that do hit (pre-5e, I saw that done with Damage Reduction a lot; it could also be special effects for Damage Negation or for DCV).  The other is armored costumes, and that has made its way into the source material.  Batman now has a bullet proof cape, and body armor.  Many books have made those chest logos functional "the gunman unconsciously targets them, and that's where my armor is heaviest".

Share this post


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

 

CSLs are the obvious go-to.  So let's assume we want a Highly Trained Normal Human build where we accept the character will have 20s in all physical stats - peak human normal, but not legendary.  Well, we need CVs of 12 to compete with those 35 DEX Supers in the game, so we'll need +5 skill levels with DCV (25 points) and +5 skill levels with OCV, which do not exist in any edition.  Let's call those 25 points as well, so we spend 50 points.  But the 35 DEX character spent 45, recovered 15 from Speed for a net cost of 30, and has the same CVs, acts faster and has better DEX rolls.

 

Why are there 35 Dex supers in this game again? Just because there must always be Dex 35 supers in all games?

 

 

Quote

 

OK, my character is NOT a highly trained normal after all - he took a SuperSoldierSerum that made his agility superhuman, because I want to play a competitive character, not Captain Sidekick.

 

Orrrrr his Dex of 23 (or 30!) is "peak human" or "nearly superhuman" or "maximum human potential" and we just go on our way to get to the actual gaming parts.

 

 

Quote

 

Most comics feature a range of normal humans and scale up through trained people to other Supers.  Those are benchmarks. 

 

 

I would suggest that they are in fact not benchmarks. A benchmark should be specific and measurable. And as Assault (seems weird to not capitalize it) was saying in another post none of the comic book benchmarks are really meanginful.

 

I LOVE the OHATMU. Love it. I still remember way too many characters specific "lift\press" tonnages. But....

 

None of that correlates to the actual comic books except in very general ways. Ranges, not benchmarks. 

 

Quote

 

Hydra agents hit the Hulk and the Thing easily, and miss Spider-Man and Captain America.

 

 

Again though, these are fictional books with made up stories. Not games or reality simulators. 

If Cap is DCV 12 all the time and Spidey is DCV 12 all the time and Ben is DCV 6 all the time (Dex 23 and Large -2 DCV as a penalty) then the OCV 4 thugs with their +2 built-in levels in their Hydra Blaster can hit Ben and not hit Spidey and Cap.

 

Generally, averages, random numbers, situational modifiers, GM fudging for dramatic effect, and so on.

 

Quote

  So shouldn't VIPER agents perform similarly? 

 

 

I have no idea. I've never used any VIPER stats for anything. Again: Do YOU want them to perform that way? In YOUR games? 

Because 4th, 5th, 6th, or roll-your-own you're going to have to do that kind of work in a Hero game. 

 

Quote

The Yancy Street Gang throws tomatoes at Ben Grimm and hits him pretty routinely.  If he has a DEX of 23 and a DCV of 8, what does that make the average OCV of a street tough in the game?  Is that better or worse than a cop?  A soldier?  A Hydra agent?

 

Yah, see? This. The Yancy Street Gang throwing tomatoes at Ben is a fictional episode. I don't see any reason, at all, that it needs to in any way adhere to game rules. Nor do I see a reason that the rules must be able to coherently account for random panels in random comic books. 

 

But, let's just Hero it up for funsies, eh?

 

Ben is in non-combat mode while chillin' on Yancy Street. His DCV is a 4. The YSG are all cinematic reality youths and have a Dex of 12 (as high as trained cops?!? HOW!?!?). They throw things a lot as a neighborhood sport so they're +1 or +2 with throwing stuff. 

YSG is now OCV 5 versus Ben's DCV 4 and they can hit him with tomatoes when they surprise him.

 

See? Easy. And kinda pointless. 

 

Unless you set up the battle mat and go to the Speed chart to resolve street youths throwing tomatoes at your 500+pt PCs. 

That seems like an RP interstitial scene and not something that needs to be modeled in Hero combat system reality.

But it's trivial to do so if I want to.

 

But in the comics I'd just have the tomatoes hit Ben and I wouldn't roll anything or stat it up. I'd do it 'cause it fit the story I was telling and I wouldn't worry about the potential inconsistency of these street toughs potentially having the same stat range as Hydra Agents\Olympic Gymnasts.

 

You know what I'm sayin'?

 

Quote

 

Comparisons are what differentiate the characters.  I doubt any of us would disagree that the ranking of agility is Spidey at the top, then Cap, then the Thing.  So how far above a Hydra agent, a Yancy Street tough or a normal human is the Thing?  We know Cap is further up, and Spidey even higher.

 

Right.

Spidey at 36, Cap at 30, Ben at 23, regular Hydra goons at 15, special Hydra goons at 18, Yancy Street Gang youths at 12 (15 for "the wirey one" or "the twitchy one"). 

 

ORRRR, if my GM wants a more lower powered option....Spidey at 30, Cap at 23, The Thing at 18, Hydra goons at 12, Special Hydra goons at 15, and YSG youths...still at 12. 

 

ORRRR if my GM wants a more high powered option....Spidey at 37, Cap at 32, Ben at 27, and Hydra goons at 18.

 

Whatever works for the campaign you're playing or wanting to run. Just like all editions of the rules. 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

When the defaults are not useful character builds, it doesn't really help.  And only SOME things scale.  I've seen a few Hero novices discover just how bad an idea it was to take a 10 PRE, or even a 10 EGO. 

 

So in 5th we have defaults that more or less WILL be adjusted to make them work and in 6th we have defaults that MUST be adjusted to make them work. But in 5th you can just slap together an NPC (because we have to stat all our NPCs, right? And we can't just eyeball stuff and go on the fly) and know that his CV will track with his general physical coordination and such.

 

The bigger, stronger, tougher guy automatically gets more Stun than the skinny, weak, feeble guy.

 

I'd say...functionally it doesn't matter at all. All PCs will adhere to points, and fully statted NPCs will adhere to points, and all on-the-fly creations probably won't and don't matter.

 

Very minor. But...scaling Figureds do provide default ranges. No scaling doesn't. 

Scaling is better. IMO, obvs.

 

As for Ego not scaling...I mean...it's not a Figured Stat, so...that's not what I'm talking about? 

But then also Ego scales your Ego rolls and your resistance to mental attacks, you just have to buy it up, like all stats.

 

Why not buy up Manual\Fine Motor Dex and also split out Pedal\Gross Motor Dex? Does it "make sense" that a gymnast can pick locks well? 

Why not buy up HtH damage separate from Strength? I've certainly encountered folks that hit harder than they lift. 

For that matter how does it make any logical sense that my martial arts abilities let me dodge bullets?

Why not split out OCV and DCV in to Ranged and Melee OCV and DCV. So we can *finally* stat out that Rocky-like boxer who won't also be a crack shot (some might say, "Rambo like").

In fact dodging bullets doesn't really make sense anyway, so we should slap a default -3 (Ranged) DCV penalty on folks against guns.

 

And so on.

I don't think those would be good changes. 

Lack of Figureds seems the same way to me.

 

On the one hand it makes sense (to me) as a logical extension of the Hero philosophy.

On the other hand I don't think it improves anything and has certain (fairly small) negatives. 

 

Reducing the default Stun mod and such are also small, progressive, changes that I think are both good\reasonable and also essentially irrelevant (GMs could always change that stuff for their game).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, TranquiloUno said:

Unless you set up the battle mat and go to the Speed chart to resolve street youths throwing tomatoes at your 500+pt PCs. 

 

This encounter can be really fun when done right and give the characters a reminder of how powerful they are between battles with incredibly dangerous opponents.

 

The Dwarven Sapper from my Saturday game hit the streets at night to get some information on the big bad they're stalking and missed his streetwise roll by a large amount.  So to spice that up I had the two street toughs he was chatting up pull knives on him and tell him to "hand over the gold, little man.".  I had them set as DEX 11, OCV 4, Speed 3 and the Dwarven Sapper is north of 250 pts and Speed 4 with a modest number of magical items to boot.

 

In a single turn he has both goons down, one badly unconscious and damaged, the other out-on-his-feet without even going for his real weapons.  One guy at the table remarked it was like the punks and decided to mug the Punisher and they all had a good laugh.

 

 

Share this post


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

 

This encounter can be really fun when done right and give the characters a reminder of how powerful they are between battles with incredibly dangerous opponents.

 

The Dwarven Sapper from my Saturday game hit the streets at night to get some information on the big bad they're stalking and missed his streetwise roll by a large amount.  So to spice that up I had the two street toughs he was chatting up pull knives on him and tell him to "hand over the gold, little man.".  I had them set as DEX 11, OCV 4, Speed 3 and the Dwarven Sapper is north of 250 pts and Speed 4 with a modest number of magical items to boot.

 

In a single turn he has both goons down, one badly unconscious and damaged, the other out-on-his-feet without even going for his real weapons.  One guy at the table remarked it was like the punks and decided to mug the Punisher and they all had a good laugh.

 

 

 

That's cool! :)

 

And I think you could def do something for The Thing when the other players don't show up to the session (or whatever).

Friendly combat encounter versus a bunch of high DCV\high AK:Yancy Street, high mobility types with sight Flash (tomatoes) and nothing else.

How does he nab those rascally teens without actually hurting them, destroying anything, or looking like a chump?

 

Could be a very fun fight. And thrown together on an ad-hoc, rather than planned, basis.

 

But I don't think I'd make it routine. Nor, as in your example, would I expect minor opponents to be a serious threat.

 

Of course The Thing has a higher OCV\DCV than the YSG. Since DCV can represent blocking and not just not getting hit (right?) then if they fail to "hit" with their tomatoes then Ben has just blocked it from hitting him in the face\eyes.

 

Anyway...that's a fun example for sure. But not really what I was talking about. :)

 

 

Share this post


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

 

Why are there 35 Dex supers in this game again? Just because there must always be Dex 35 supers in all games?

 

Orrrrr his Dex of 23 (or 30!) is "peak human" or "nearly superhuman" or "maximum human potential" and we just go on our way to get to the actual gaming parts.

 

Because most gamers use the published materials, including the core rules’ suggested stat levels, benchmark for normal humans and sample characters, as well as characters published in other books. 

 

The gamers least likely to seek and rely on this published guidance of “author/designer intent” are also those most likely to be familiar with the rules, and thus best able to set appropriate stats without the need for figured characteristics.

 

23 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

I would suggest that they are in fact not benchmarks. A benchmark should be specific and measurable. And as Assault (seems weird to not capitalize it) was saying in another post none of the comic book benchmarks are really meanginful.

 

I LOVE the OHATMU. Love it. I still remember way too many characters specific "lift\press" tonnages. But....

 

None of that correlates to the actual comic books except in very general ways. Ranges, not benchmarks.

I don’t see Ben get hit by Hydra agents in OHATMU. I see it in the comics.  In my view, effective game mechanics deliver a feel like the source material they are intended to simulate.  That may be those four colour comics I read, which I want to simulate in a game, or the MCU where soldiers and mook aliens shoot and hit the Hulk.

 

And "21-30 is legendary" is a range which is also a benchmark, by the way.

 

23 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

Again though, these are fictional books with made up stories. Not games or reality simulators. 

Newsflash – the games set fictional scenarios for fictional characters and play out made up stories.  Again, if the mechanics do not facilitate gameplay aligned with the source material, they are not “superior”.

 

23 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

Generally, averages, random numbers, situational modifiers, GM fudging for dramatic effect, and so on.

 

 

Why have any stats if the GM will just fudge them away and VIPER agents hit Ben, but miss Spidey and Cap, because that is most consistent with their abilities, and best for dramatic effect?  Just let the players say “I try to do this” and the GM can narrate their success or failure.

 

All RPG rules really do is set out a model to adjudicate a game of “let’s pretend” so we don’t sit around a table saying “I shoot you”  “no you missed”  “no I hit”.  Instead, we apply the game stats, roll the dice and determine whether the shot was successful.  [And maybe argue about modifiers that should have means I hit, or I missed J]

 

23 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

Yah, see? This. The Yancy Street Gang throwing tomatoes at Ben is a fictional episode. I don't see any reason, at all, that it needs to in any way adhere to game rules. Nor do I see a reason that the rules must be able to coherently account for random panels in random comic books. 

 

But, let's just Hero it up for funsies, eh?

 

Ben is in non-combat mode while chillin' on Yancy Street. His DCV is a 4. The YSG are all cinematic reality youths and have a Dex of 12 (as high as trained cops?!? HOW!?!?). They throw things a lot as a neighborhood sport so they're +1 or +2 with throwing stuff. 

YSG is now OCV 5 versus Ben's DCV 4 and they can hit him with tomatoes when they surprise him.

 

See? Easy. And kinda pointless.

 

 

As compared to sitting around a table to throw dice and see whether Dr. Doom conquers the world or the heroes save the day?  The point of any game session is entertainment.  The games are made up of fictional episodes. 

 

And once Ben starts chasing those Yancy Streeters, he is no longer surprised, so should have his full DCV.  Yet the rotten fruits and vegetables keep hitting him.

 

23 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

Right.

Spidey at 36, Cap at 30, Ben at 23, regular Hydra goons at 15, special Hydra goons at 18, Yancy Street Gang youths at 12 (15 for "the wirey one" or "the twitchy one"). 

 

ORRRR, if my GM wants a more lower powered option....Spidey at 30, Cap at 23, The Thing at 18, Hydra goons at 12, Special Hydra goons at 15, and YSG youths...still at 12. 

 

ORRRR if my GM wants a more high powered option....Spidey at 37, Cap at 32, Ben at 27, and Hydra goons at 18.

 

Whatever works for the campaign you're playing or wanting to run. Just like all editions of the rules.

How is that different with or without Figureds?  With Figured, we have Spidey 2 CV better than Cap, Cap 2 CV better than the Thing, and Hydra 3 CV below the Thing.  So they rarely hit the Thing (unless they have OCV augmenting blasters which means they never miss those SHIELD agents, even the elite ones, working side by side with Spidey, Cap and Ben…unless we give them Magic Blaster Deflecting Underoos).

 

Without Figureds, we have a lot more freedom to look to the comics, and see Ben effortlessly Grabbing Hydra goons – great OCV, so we’ll give him a 10 – not enough to reliably hit Spidey, but Spidey’s taking a pretty big risk if he does not dodge (which, in the comics, he tends to do).  But those VIPER agents tag him all the time, so we will put his DCV at, say, a 5.  Now those 4 OCV VIPER agents hit half the time.  That feels more like the comics.  And the points Ben saved from having a lower DCV can be used for other abilities (like whatever he uses to Grab dozens of Hydra agents at a time), rather than being Large to lose DCV through the Disadvantages system and therefore being able to take a lower Hunted roll.

 

Meanwhile, it is much easier for Cap to have a higher OCV than DCV, while Spidey’s DCV is better than his OCV.  Cap does not have to boost OCV with 8 point combat skill levels while Spidey spends 6 points (net of Speed Rebate) for +1 OCV and DCV that work at the same time, all the time.  I find that a significant mechanical superiority of 6e over 5e all by itself.

 

23 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

So in 5th we have defaults that more or less WILL be adjusted to make them work and in 6th we have defaults that MUST be adjusted to make them work. But in 5th you can just slap together an NPC (because we have to stat all our NPCs, right? And we can't just eyeball stuff and go on the fly) and know that his CV will track with his general physical coordination and such.

 

The bigger, stronger, tougher guy automatically gets more Stun than the skinny, weak, feeble guy.

 

Or we simply have a standard stat range for thugs which includes DEX, OCV, DCV, STUN, REC, END, etc. with no need for mathing out figureds at all.  We can have slap-together NPCs without Figured pretty easily.

 

Default ranges are just as easily provided in a chart like we have for defenses, CVs, etc. and have throughout many editions.

O

h, and maybe the bigger, stronger guy has a glass jaw.

 

23 hours ago, TranquiloUno said:

As for Ego not scaling...I mean...it's not a Figured Stat, so...that's not what I'm talking about? 

But then also Ego scales your Ego rolls and your resistance to mental attacks, you just have to buy it up, like all stats.

 

It’s not figured because we didn’t make it figured.  Back in 1e, Ego enhanced mental defense just like STR enhanced PD and CON enhanced ED (except Ego only enhanced mental defense if you also bought some mental defense, although some groups waived that rule and made mental defense a standard figured characteristic).  We could make power Defense and flash Defense figured, mental defense has been both over the years.  BOD could be derived from, say, STR and CON (basic roll playing averages SIZE and CON for hit points, doesn’t it)?  PD and ED can be decoupled from STR and CON, and SPD is easy to decouple from DEX.

 

The argument that "ego is not figured so it is not derived from something else" is no different than pointing at 6e and saying "you don't get STUN from STR and CON because STUN is not a figured characteristic", or "you don't get SPD, OCV and DCV from DEX because they are not Figured", or "you don't get Life Support from CON" [you did in at least one old Marvel Supers game, and D&D 1e gave Regen to CON above 18]. 

 

Because there are no figured characteristics, no characteristics are figured.  IOW, anything we want can be Figured, or not, so “because it is, or is not figured” is not a reason for why any given ability is, or is not, Figured.

 

Ultimately, I think the combination of better point balance and better character customizability makes removal of Figured as good step.  Now, I recall discussing in the lead-up to 6e, why we don’t, having set the price of CVs, and fixed the price of REC, STUN and END, keep Figured, maybe tweaking the formuli a bit, ensure the primaries are priced appropriately, set “no figured” separate for each stat to remove the embedded cost of the Figured’s and delete the “only one sellback” restriction.  Then those who like figureds still have them, and there is one less major change between 5e and 6e.

 

If I remember right, this was a SETAC discussion.  We knew where Steve was leaning, but not the exact new pricing of the characteristics. His answer was pretty simple, and I agree with it.  If the pricing is appropriate, why do we need to differentiate primary and figured characteristics at all? 

 

I agree that the answer was “we don’t”.  We can buy the stats we want. 

 

CON only does one thing?  So what?  BOD and STUN only do one thing, and there are plenty of others.  Pretty much every stat that does more than one thing has a construct to buy each of those things independently.  Often, their pricing is messed up – which was the core problem with pre-6e Figureds.

 

 

 

 

COM didn't even do ONE thing, and look at the furore over its replacement with Striking Appearance - that actually DOES do something.  [oh please don't let this reopen the COM Wars...]

Share this post


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

Because most gamers use the published materials, including the core rules’ suggested stat levels, benchmark for normal humans and sample characters, as well as characters published in other books. 

 

But your example was a Highly Trained Normal who, for some reason, needs CVs of 12 to compete with 35 Dex supers.

IF that character can only have 20s in their stats, but also need to hit CV12 for general use, THEN I'd think they'd need to use CSLs. Or buy their stats higher, even tho that might make them, "Legendary".

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

The gamers least likely to seek and rely on this published guidance of “author/designer intent” are also those most likely to be familiar with the rules, and thus best able to set appropriate stats without the need for figured characteristics.

 

So you're saying that experienced folks won't need to use it and that inexperienced folks should just use the reference ranges provided? And that either way it should generally work out? Figured or Non-Figured, 4th or 6th, always true, right?

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

I don’t see Ben get hit by Hydra agents in OHATMU. I see it in the comics.  In my view, effective game mechanics deliver a feel like the source material they are intended to simulate.  That may be those four colour comics I read, which I want to simulate in a game, or the MCU where soldiers and mook aliens shoot and hit the Hulk.

 

And if the GM has designed their mooks poorly, and so they can't hit campaign standard CVs, then I guess YOU'll need to adjust things to emulate YOUR vision of four-color comics, right?

Considering the number of builds I've seen where +DCV is a special effect of, "You hit me but it didn't hurt", and considering the number of times in the MCU that somebody unloads on somebody else and nothing that seems like a fair emulation of the genre conventions to me.

 

I could do that in 4th or 6th though. Not really..version related that I can tell.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

And "21-30 is legendary" is a range which is also a benchmark, by the way.

 

Right. A benchmark that includes the majority of the suggested general PC superhero stats and thus tells us nothing about them. Ben Grimm (ace test pilot), Wolverine (ace martial artist), Cap, and Spidey (unless Spidey needs that 36 for game purposes) would all be the same under that benchmark. That's not much of a benchmark.

Most comics include a wide range of folks but the ranges are not consistently quantified in either effect or description or relative to each other. So they aren't really benchmarks except maybe in the FASERIP sense.

IMO.

But if it's helpful to you when statting folks up: That's cool! :)

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Newsflash – the games set fictional scenarios for fictional characters and play out made up stories.  Again, if the mechanics do not facilitate gameplay aligned with the source material, they are not “superior”.

 

 

Right. So, in Hero System, what you do is you adjust the mechanics to resemble the kind of game play you are wanting to play.

 

If your version of four-color supers is heavily dependent on Hydra agents and teenage hooligans being able to consistently hit certain PCs then you should adjust the rules or the stats to provide that experience.

 

That's the fun of Hero! Don't like hit locations? Don't use 'em.

Don't want to follow suggested stat ranges that match 30+ years of published material? Don't use those ranges.

Disabling wounds seem out of place in four-color comics? Don't use Disabling Wounds rules.

 

My point is just that the comics don't adhere to a structured system (ie, Hero System) so to claim there is a single underlying agreed upon basis for them is doing it backwards. Of course we can create a model to emulate what we feel is happening in those comics (I prefer Hero System for this myself) but that's a model we've built, not some objective representation of the comic book reality (because...there isn't one).

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

 

Why have any stats if the GM will just fudge them away and VIPER agents hit Ben, but miss Spidey and Cap, because that is most consistent with their abilities, and best for dramatic effect?  Just let the players say “I try to do this” and the GM can narrate their success or failure.

 

Depends on what you're doing doesn't it? Do you, like, game, bro?

If you want rules lite, or diceless, or narrative-first, or whatever they call that stuff now...play that.

If you never ever want to fudge even a single point of Stun for dramatic effect\story purposes\other reasons...don't.

 

My point was that IF YOU wanted to create a case where Ben gets hit by the VIPER guys and Cap doesn't then YOU can set that up quite trivially.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

All RPG rules really do is set out a model to adjudicate a game of “let’s pretend” so we don’t sit around a table saying “I shoot you”  “no you missed”  “no I hit”.  Instead, we apply the game stats, roll the dice and determine whether the shot was successful.  [And maybe argue about modifiers that should have means I hit, or I missed J]

 

No kidding?

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

 

As compared to sitting around a table to throw dice and see whether Dr. Doom conquers the world or the heroes save the day?  The point of any game session is entertainment.  The games are made up of fictional episodes. 

 

So you think the Marvel and DC guys have a secret RPG system they use to consistently adjudicate all superhero comic fights in an objective manner and they don't, like, write stories and have things happen for dramatic purposes?

It's the underlying coherent systems of actual rules versus "I just made all this stuff up because it's a cool story" part I'm talking about.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

And once Ben starts chasing those Yancy Streeters, he is no longer surprised, so should have his full DCV.  Yet the rotten fruits and vegetables keep hitting him.

 

Oh, no! Hero System is ruined! We can't just give those YSG guys more levels to hit!!! It would undermine everything!

 

Again: If YOU the GM want to have a fun scenario involving one of your players then you, the GM, should probably consider designing it work the way you want to. If you, the GM, use a low OCV and the scene doesn't play out exactly as it does in the comics\your mind then...like adjust your simulation to produce results you like.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

How is that different with or without Figureds?  With Figured, we have Spidey 2 CV better than Cap, Cap 2 CV better than the Thing, and Hydra 3 CV below the Thing.  So they rarely hit the Thing (unless they have OCV augmenting blasters which means they never miss those SHIELD agents, even the elite ones, working side by side with Spidey, Cap and Ben…unless we give them Magic Blaster Deflecting Underoos).

 

...I don't know? How is it? Doesn't seem related to Figureds to me. Seems to be related to how you could\should scale stat ranges to produce the world\gameplay you desire.

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Without Figureds, we have a lot more freedom to look to the comics, and see Ben effortlessly Grabbing Hydra goons – great OCV, so we’ll give him a 10 – not enough to reliably hit Spidey, but Spidey’s taking a pretty big risk if he does not dodge (which, in the comics, he tends to do).  But those VIPER agents tag him all the time, so we will put his DCV at, say, a 5.  Now those 4 OCV VIPER agents hit half the time.  That feels more like the comics.  And the points Ben saved from having a lower DCV can be used for other abilities (like whatever he uses to Grab dozens of Hydra agents at a time), rather than being Large to lose DCV through the Disadvantages system and therefore being able to take a lower Hunted roll.

 

Or you just adjust the Figureds!!!!

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Meanwhile, it is much easier for Cap to have a higher OCV than DCV, while Spidey’s DCV is better than his OCV.  Cap does not have to boost OCV with 8 point combat skill levels while Spidey spends 6 points (net of Speed Rebate) for +1 OCV and DCV that work at the same time, all the time.  I find that a significant mechanical superiority of 6e over 5e all by itself.

 

Sure. Again: Figureds or non-Figureds seems incredibly minor to me. I prefer them. I also think decoupling everything is the logical end point of Hero System. I just don't think it's particularly valuable because I can do all that stuff already.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

 

Or we simply have a standard stat range for thugs which includes DEX, OCV, DCV, STUN, REC, END, etc. with no need for mathing out figureds at all.  We can have slap-together NPCs without Figured pretty easily.

 

Well...you'll be mathing it out to the extent that they have values, right?

Same in all versions?

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Default ranges are just as easily provided in a chart like we have for defenses, CVs, etc. and have throughout many editions.

 

Yes, that's what I'm saying. Default ranges are just default ranges. Provided in a chart. We can adjust them if we want to and as we want to. Same in all versions.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

O

h, and maybe the bigger, stronger guy has a glass jaw.

 

Maybe! Maybe we could emulate that in, like, a ton of different ways!

 

Glass Jaw could be: Low Stun, Low Con (easy to Stun), Accidental Change when punched (changes to an unconscious form ;) ) or a bunch of other ways (Vulnerability to being punched in the jaw). As suited to the game you're actually playing\wanting to play.

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

It’s not figured because we didn’t make it figured.  Back in 1e, Ego enhanced mental defense just like STR enhanced PD and CON enhanced ED (except Ego only enhanced mental defense if you also bought some mental defense, although some groups waived that rule and made mental defense a standard figured characteristic).  We could make power Defense and flash Defense figured, mental defense has been both over the years.  BOD could be derived from, say, STR and CON (basic roll playing averages SIZE and CON for hit points, doesn’t it)?  PD and ED can be decoupled from STR and CON, and SPD is easy to decouple from DEX.

 

Right, so, IF Ego did boost\provide Mental Def THEN increasing your Ego would increase your Mental Def. And then it would scale. If MD was figured from Ego.

We COULD Figure a bunch of stats if we wanted! AND it might even be a great idea to do that...you know, IF that seems useful for YOUR game.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

The argument that "ego is not figured so it is not derived from something else" is no different than pointing at 6e and saying "you don't get STUN from STR and CON because STUN is not a figured characteristic", or "you don't get SPD, OCV and DCV from DEX because they are not Figured", or "you don't get Life Support from CON" [you did in at least one old Marvel Supers game, and D&D 1e gave Regen to CON above 18]. 

 

Because there are no figured characteristics, no characteristics are figured.  IOW, anything we want can be Figured, or not, so “because it is, or is not figured” is not a reason for why any given ability is, or is not, Figured.

 

What's your point here? We could do that, and yes, no figured char mean...no char are figured.

 

Sorry I think I'm missing something. YOUR point seemed to be that "only SOME things scale" and I was just saying that of course a non-figured stat doesn't scale a figured stat, due to there being no figured stat from it.

If Ego did add to Ego Defense then it would scale with it.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Ultimately, I think the combination of better point balance and better character customizability makes removal of Figured as good step.  Now, I recall discussing in the lead-up to 6e, why we don’t, having set the price of CVs, and fixed the price of REC, STUN and END, keep Figured, maybe tweaking the formuli a bit, ensure the primaries are priced appropriately, set “no figured” separate for each stat to remove the embedded cost of the Figured’s and delete the “only one sellback” restriction.  Then those who like figureds still have them, and there is one less major change between 5e and 6e.

 

Indeed. No conflicts between having Figureds and also individually adjusting game stats (even O\DECV if you want). That's what I'm saying. Minor stuff.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

If I remember right, this was a SETAC discussion.  We knew where Steve was leaning, but not the exact new pricing of the characteristics. His answer was pretty simple, and I agree with it.  If the pricing is appropriate, why do we need to differentiate primary and figured characteristics at all? 

 

Need? No need.

Preference for scaling baselines that relate to primary stats? I do in fact prefer that.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

I agree that the answer was “we don’t”.  We can buy the stats we want. 

 

Sure. And if there are Figureds then....you can buy the stats you want.

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

CON only does one thing?  So what?  BOD and STUN only do one thing, and there are plenty of others.  Pretty much every stat that does more than one thing has a construct to buy each of those things independently.  Often, their pricing is messed up – which was the core problem with pre-6e Figureds.

 

Pricing does seem to be an issue for some folks.

6e is certainly mechanically more explicit than prior versions.

But even KS said in this thread that 4th seemed more\most fun. But then loads of us run 5th and 6th and they are fun too. Probably mostly because they are 90%+ identical and all differences are quite minor.

 

Given we can adjust Figureds as we want, leave COM out of the game if we want, create Talents\Powers\Disads that provide real in-game mechanical effects from being good looking\ugly, and so on, in any edition...

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

 

 

 

COM didn't even do ONE thing, and look at the furore over its replacement with Striking Appearance - that actually DOES do something.  [oh please don't let this reopen the COM Wars...]

 

It was the BEST stat and the underlying foundation of the Hero System!!!! To remove COM is to spit in the face of George MacDonald!!!   ;D

 

 

 

Srsly tho: Having or not having Figureds seems like a fine optional rule. I prefer them. But I think most of them get adjusted regardless of what the base is or if they are Figured or not.

For character creation, while not explicitly spelled out in 4th or 5th, there are loads of ways to adjust any...anything, right?

 

Figureds or non-Figureds won't change Ben Grimm's Dex value in your game. And if his Dex is 24 and that's too high then...why does he have it?

If he has 23 Dex because that's where the campaign ended up and then he can't have tomato\snowball fights with the kids? Well then...somebody should adjust something, right?

 

That's what I'm getting at.

 

There is no Dex. Cops and Trained soldiers differ in their capabilities. But for our purposes of modeling reality for game reasons...we've got Dex and we can use it to model stuff.

We can use CV too. We can directly modify CV, indirectly modify it, or just set it to the values we want to use.

 

 

I understand your point, and the points of several others, is that having CV as it's own stat allows you to create effects like a guy that's easier to hit but also better at hitting and a mentalist who is great on attack but sucks on defense and so on. All the potential (endless) examples of concepts that might need to have those values differ.

I don't see this as a big issue personally. I would just adjust them as a GM, or talk to my GM about adjusting them as a player (and is there a GM out there that's going to tell you "No! It's against the rules!!!" if you want your Ben Grimmalike to have a lower DCV than their Dex would normally give them?).

So, to me, again, the individually adjustable CVs\other are very minor things, easily done if desired. So then Figured\non-Figured is very minor.

 

But...you know, if you have strong feelings about emulating tomato fights with kids in your game, and using the standard reference ranges for PCs causes issues with that....do something about it. In your game.

Have Ben sell down his DCV, or say that part of his DCV is he got hit but it just didn't do much , or whatever you gotta do to run the game you want to run.

 

Hero is point based so increasing a PCs general points will generally produce increases across the whole range. Unless you limit it with campaign specific guidelines or general purpose GM fiat.

If Ben is 250pts under 4th or 400pt under 4th he'll have different stats.

 

If you want to play early FF where Ben randomly reverts to human form and he's only got a 15 Dex because you're running 200pt supers in 6th then...fine? Even if that's not realistic for a top test pilot. Even if we reduce his extensive test pilot history to PS: Test Pilot and a single Transport Familiarity and don't even give him Combat Piloting.

 

I know you know all that so this is why I find your posts confusing.

 

On the one hand you have very specific forms of four-color emulation you desire. YSG and Hyrda agents. On the other hand you're talking about stat guidelines from published Hero stats that have been more or less unchanged for a long time.

On the one hand you can now officially adjust Ben's DCV to match your specific desires. On the other hand you could already do that. Even with Figured Char.

 

Figured\Non-Figured seems pretty minor. Easily optional. And I prefer having them. Minor stuff.

Individually adjusting game elements seems like a good idea. And I think it was easy to do already if desired. Minor stuff.

 

 

But if you think that a 23 Dex Ben Grimm is a problem...wooooo, I'll just type a lotta words about how you're doing Hero wrong. :):)

 

Do you see what I'm coming from on this?
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...