How valuable is Dexterity?

[dekrass]

Is Dexterity really twice as good as the other basic characteristics? 

I started reading the HERO System rules (6e) a few months ago and have played a little. The cost of dexterity has kind of bugged me the whole time. What am I missing? What makes it worth twice the cost of strength, presence, or intelligence?

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

They're actually all mispriced! 

 

If DEX were priced at 1 point per, then the value of the bonus to DEX skills and the initiative boost would be more than the DEX that grants them costs.  But at 2 points per, DEX costs more than the composite bonuses it grants. 

Similar things are true for INT, STR, PRE, etc.  They'd need fractional values to be properly priced. 

 

It's just that DEX was judged to be "round up" material while others were "round down" material. 

[Hugh Neilson]

This seems to come up a lot, and so does my stock response.  Apologies to those who are bored seeing it again.  I got bored typing it again, so this time I saved it for future cut & paste.

 

To the costing of DEX, my initial feeling was that DEX should be 1 point, just like INT and PRE.  However, that view evolved.  My conclusion was that DEX is not overpriced.  We're starting from the pre-6e baseline that PRE and INT both cost 1 point, and since we removed enough from DEX to make it equivalent, DEX should cost 1 point.

 

I think DEX actually is worth 2 points.  Half of that goes to "+ to all DEX rolls", so it should cost 5 points for +1 to all DEX rolls (not +1 to any 1 DEX roll at a time - +1 to each and every roll based on DEX), and we should have more limited versions down to +1 for only one application of a DEX roll (not the current +2 points for +1 to a skill). 

 

Gradations between the two would reduce the scope of rolls that can be modified, and only allow one to be modified at a time.  This would replace the current skill levels model.

 

The other half of the price of DEX goes to Lightning Reflexes, with the ability to buy that separately, again starting at 5 points = +5 “initiative” for all abilities and limited for more restricted applications.

 

The issue is that PRE and INT are underpriced.  They should also be 2 points, just like DEX.

 

INT provide INT rolls (price these like DEX rolls) and PER rolls (also to be priced like DEX rolls), so 5 points for +1 to all rolls for either one and limit down.

 

PRE provides PRE rolls and PRE attacks.   Same model for PRE attacks, +1d6 PRE attacks costs 5 points, limit down for restrictive application.  Striking Appearance is +5 PRE, limited for how frequently it applies.  Other abilities might enhance only PRE attacks, or only PRE rolls.

 

Where id PRE defense go?  In my vision, PRE defense becomes exclusive to EGO, the price of which stays 1 point.  Half of EGO is EGO rolls (there are far fewer, as it does not drive skills) and the other half is PRE defense (and defense is cheaper than attack).

 

The characteristic price aligns with the cost of buying the components.

[Toxxus]

There can be tremendous value in going first.

 

One of the real benefits of going first is the ability to hold your action, let your opponent do a thing and then go twice back to back (after enemy in current phase, before enemy in next phase).

 

DEX rolls also tend to be called into play during dangerous situations.  Would you like to leap away from the fireball?  DEX roll.  Would you like to try to grab the edge of the pit before you fall 30 feet onto poisoned spikes?  DEX roll.

 

Haven't had anyone I've ever played with balk at the price of DEX.

 

Quoting the legendary Kung Fu Hustle:  In the world of kung fu, speed (DEX) defines the winner.

[ghost-angel]

My opinion is If DEX is worth 2 Points per +1; then so are all the other Base Characteristics.

IF STR, CON, EGO, INT, and PRE are only worth 1 point per +1, then so is DEX.

 

If feel DEX is no more and no less valuable than the other Characteristics, especially from a strict System As A Toolkit point of view; costing one Characteristic higher automatically places system emphasis on that characteristics aspects. And a neutral tool kit should not do that.

 

tldr; Hugh's explanation of why it's both costed correctly and incorrectly is the best.

[Killer Shrike]

I've said several time that I think the "go first" aspect of DEX should have been split off into a separate secondary stat, call it "Initiative" (or just let lightning reflexes cover it entirely, similar to striking appearance and killing off COM), and DEX would then be priced at a 1:1 ratio.

 

It REALLY bothers my that it's the one hold out among primaries with an inconsistent costing.

[Christopher R Taylor]

The first thing to remember is that for Hero, combat is a priority when it comes to pricing.  That's why the ability to read and speak a language with all of its idioms and accents perfectly is worth only 5 points, but you can only get one martial arts maneuver for that price.

 

Dexterity is very combat heavy, very world-interaction heavy.  It controls who goes first, it is the key for many combat abilities such as fast draw, and it controls most world-impacting rather than interpersonal skills.  Role playing concepts like conversation, languages, and persuasion are all cheaper than combat stuff because of this basic principle.  So Presence, while important, isn't as expensive as Dexterity, which is very powerful.

 

Splitting off who goes first into a different stat probably fits the 6th edition philosophy better, but the last thing we need is yet another characteristic, particularly one that devalues the existing ones even further, in my opinion.

[Scott Ruggels]

A high Dex is analogous to having a High altitude in a dogfight. It confers more control and greater options, and therefore a higher chance of success in one's endeavors. Remember, Hero was and is primarily a combat game.  as such that which gives you an advantage in combat is more expensive.

[Hugh Neilson]

10 hours ago, ghost-angel said:

My opinion is If DEX is worth 2 Points per +1; then so are all the other Base Characteristics.

IF STR, CON, EGO, INT, and PRE are only worth 1 point per +1, then so is DEX.

 

If feel DEX is no more and no less valuable than the other Characteristics, especially from a strict System As A Toolkit point of view; costing one Characteristic higher automatically places system emphasis on that characteristics aspects. And a neutral tool kit should not do that.

 

tldr; Hugh's explanation of why it's both costed correctly and incorrectly is the best.

 

My analysis sticks to DEX, INT, PRE and EGO for a few reasons.  First, DEX, INT and PRE are very similar stats, each giving a bonus to rolls on which many skills are based, and "something else".  Second, what they provide has alternate means of purchase (at least in most cases) so we have an alternate purchase mechanism to compare with.  EGO gets dragged in mainly because I could not get PRE to work without removing PRE defense, and also because it is the basis for rolls, even if they are not used all that often.  I think I would bundle "resistance to mental powers" into the part of EGO that grants EGO rolls. 

 

That draws Mental Defense into the mix. I'd allow Mental Defense, only reduces effect rolls, at -1.  That makes it the same cost as Ego, only for rolls and resistance of mental powers.  Buying limited Mental Defense will also reduce cumulative effect rolls each time (ego only adds to the amount which must accumulate) while the limited Ego provides better Ego rolls.  I am somewhat biased in that I think Cumulative should be a lot more common build approach to make mental powers less "save or suck"/all or nothing.

 

I am OK with STR at 5 points, but I think it needs some extrapolation into Martial Maneuvers and Hand Attack.  I am thinking the answer may be getting rid of Martial DCs and Hand Attack, and instead creating a concept of "DC adders".  Deadly Blow and Weaponmaster suggest that "only to increase damage" is a -1/2 limitation on a skill level.  I think it is higher - OCV and DCV are worth at least half of the value of a skill level.  So, if we started with the premise that +1 DC for any one attack at a time is 10 points (2 skill levels with All Combat, damage only (-1), we could move to HTH only (either a -1/2 limitation, so 20/2.5 = 8 or 2 8 point skill levels only to add damage = 8).

 

Working down from there, maybe "only for martial maneuvers" or "only for non-martial maneuvers" are -1/2 limitations (tacked on to HTH only).  That drops me down to 20/3 = 6.67 per +1 DC with all martial arts maneuvers, or all non-martial maneuvers.  I'm also at 8 for all ranged maneuvers, or 6 2/3 if they can only be with martial or non-martial maneuvers. 

 

These cost no END.  Since the base at +1 DC costs 10 points, they should cost 1 END, so STR bundles these in at half END (20/3.25, still over 6 points).  The math is pushing to the conclusion that STR is also underpriced, isn't it?  It does not feel like a full 2 points, though - STR with no damage a -2 limitation, and STR that only enhances damage at -1/2?  Maybe 2 points is not out of the realm of possibility.  Break our mindset of Active Points and let the Brick spend 100 points on +50 STR and we'd be OK.

 

CON only resists STUN and is OK at 1 point in my view.  It's become a "tracking stat" like BOD and STUN.  It's also a form of character tax - you need enough CON that a campaign standard attack will not stun you. 

 

No issues with PD, ED, SPD, REC, STUN or END.

 

10 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

I've said several time that I think the "go first" aspect of DEX should have been split off into a separate secondary stat, call it "Initiative" (or just lightning reflexes cover it entirely, similar to striking appearance and killing off COM), and DEX would then be priced at a 1:1 ratio.

 

It REALLY bothers my that it's the one hold out among primaries with an inconsistent costing.

 

This is my approach turned 90 degrees, I think.  We agree that the initiative aspect should be 1 point and the roll aspect should be 1 point.  But what should the cost of +1 to all PRE rolls with no PRE attack be, or vice versa?  INT rolls segregated from PER rolls?  All of this needs to tie into the price of skill levels as well.  A more radical approach would be, as you say, to move a lot of these abilities out of characteristics and into other build components, although I would say that SA is "limited PRE", so there is nothing wrong with Lightning Reflexes, or Enhanced Perception, being "limited DEX" and "Limited INT".  I am more focused on making skill levels "Limited Characteristic", I suppose.

 

There is, however, a significant advantage in such a breakdown.  If we think, for example, that +1 to all INT rolls is worth 5 points and +1 to all PER rolls is worth 3, we have to cost +5 INT at 8 points.  If you just buy the rolls, you price them at +1 for 5 and 3 points, respectively.  This could also address the STR conundrum.  It resolves the PRE defense issue as well - whether your SFX link to your own PRE or your EGO, you pay for PRE defense separately, so that is just SFX. 

 

Now, imagine the Boards as we explain the purchase of what used to be DEX, INT, PRE or STR using Unified Power, Linked, etc...and how Adjustment Powers will work.

 

10 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

A high Dex is analogous to having a High altitude in a dogfight. It confers more control and greater options, and therefore a higher chance of success in one's endeavors. Remember, Hero was and is primarily a combat game.  as such that which gives you an advantage in combat is more expensive.

 

The key reason I do not see this as an argument for DEX to cost more than INT and PRE is the skill level cost.  If the value of DEX were in "lightning reflexes", then set the price of +3 with all INT, PRE or DEX rolls at 10 points.  That leaves the price of +3d6 PRE attack and +3 with all PER rolls at 5 points, and you can set Lighting Reflexes at +15 initiative costs 20 points.  That sounds harder than it is - it is a -1/2 limitation for INT or PRE on skill rolls, or -2 for DEX, with a -2 limitation on INT for PER rolls or PRE for PRE attacks, and a -1/2 for DEX for initiative.

 

Practically, like many things Hero, the value of Initiative varies between games.  I see the same thing in  d20 where some players are all over boosting Initiative, while others are focused on, well, "I am less concerned with striking first than striking last - as in, I am still standing and my opponent is not, at the end of the battle".  The higher the DC to Defense ratio, the greater the value in first strike.

[ghost-angel]

10 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Remember, Hero was and is primarily a combat game.

 

This is the sticking point I have; because I don't really see it that way (or want to I should say). While Hero definitely has a very detailed combat system, I don't see the system overall as leaning in that direction. It has a very well plotted out skill system as well, a decent social interaction system, and a lot of non-combat elements to it.

 

But, by placing DEX at a higher cost, the system has made sure that your statement is a correct default assumption.

[Tech]

As you guys have said about Comliness (modified): if you want to change it, go ahead; it's your game.

 

If you want the cost at 1/1 ratio, do it, otherwise it is 2 pts per 1 pt of Dex for 6th edition.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

I've said several time that I think the "go first" aspect of DEX should have been split off into a separate secondary stat, call it "Initiative" (or just lightning reflexes cover it entirely, similar to striking appearance and killing off COM), and DEX would then be priced at a 1:1 ratio.

The thing is, that's an argument for why DEX should cost 2 points now.

 

Quote

by placing DEX at a higher cost, the system has made sure that your statement is a correct default assumption.

 

Among other things, yes.  That's part of the evidence that Hero values combat abilities over interaction abilities as a rule system.

[Killer Shrike]

2 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

This is my approach turned 90 degrees, I think.  We agree that the initiative aspect should be 1 point and the roll aspect should be 1 point.  But what should the cost of +1 to all PRE rolls with no PRE attack be, or vice versa?  INT rolls segregated from PER rolls?  All of this needs to tie into the price of skill levels as well.  A more radical approach would be, as you say, to move a lot of these abilities out of characteristics and into other build components, although I would say that SA is "limited PRE", so there is nothing wrong with Lightning Reflexes, or Enhanced Perception, being "limited DEX" and "Limited INT".  I am more focused on making skill levels "Limited Characteristic", I suppose.

 

I actually do think PER should be separated from INT; I've talked about that in the past.

 

I don't mind that PRE allows PRE Attacks and interaction skills at 1 point because I'm ok with incentivizing / subsidizing socially capable characters in an otherwise very combat heavy system.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

I actually do think PER should be separated from INT; I've talked about that in the past.

 

I was surprised that didn't happen in 6th edition, I fully expected it once I heard CV was separated from DEX.  But then INT wouldn't be worth as much in point value, and I think the changes were less about reasonable distinction of abilities than trying to make the costs more consistent and logical.

[TranquiloUno]

3 hours ago, ghost-angel said:

 

This is the sticking point I have; because I don't really see it that way (or want to I should say). While Hero definitely has a very detailed combat system, I don't see the system overall as leaning in that direction. It has a very well plotted out skill system as well, a decent social interaction system, and a lot of non-combat elements to it.

 

But, by placing DEX at a higher cost, the system has made sure that your statement is a correct default assumption.

 

I mean...Character Creation (without Powers) is about 60 pages (5th revised). Skills as a part of that are about 7. Powers and Advantages\Limitation\Frameworks is 200ish. And Combat is just under 100 pages.

Not saying the skill system isn't well plotted, or that social interaction mechanics suck, or any of that stuff but...that's a LOT of pages spent on combat versus everything except powers.

 

 

[Hugh Neilson]

2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

The thing is, that's an argument for why DEX should cost 2 points now.

 

Among other things, yes.  That's part of the evidence that Hero values combat abilities over interaction abilities as a rule system.

 

If pricing DEX at 2 points in 6e evidences a premium placed on combat, does that mean prior editions did not place a premium?  The price of DEX did not actually fall between 5e and 6e, viewed rationally.  You spent 3 points for +1 DEX and got one point back as a Speed Rebate, so you spent 2 points for initiative, DEX skills/rolls, OCV and DCV.  It was discount priced.  No one suggested that was because Hero placed a premium on scholars and spokespeople.

 

2 hours ago, Killer Shrike said:

 

I actually do think PER should be separated from INT; I've talked about that in the past.

 

I don't mind that PRE allows PRE Attacks and interaction skills at 1 point because I'm ok with incentivizing / subsidizing socially capable characters in an otherwise very combat heavy system.

 

Wheels within wheels.  I've made the assumption that 5 points for +1 to all PRE rolls is fair.  However, if the price for +1 to all PRE roills should be less than 5 points, then it is ludicrous to price +1 to any one PRE skill at a time at 4 points. Ditto for intelligence.

 

What would you want a player to pay for only having bonuses to all PRE skills?  What about one who only wants access to PRE attacks and PRE defense?  What should it cost to enhance only the attack, or only the defense?

 

It was that kind of analysis that lead me inexorably back to the conclusion that DEX is not overpriced - INT and PRE are underpriced.  But skill levels are overpriced.

 

If the reason DEX should cost more than INT and PRE is initiative, why does +1 to any DEX skill cost 60% of the price of +10 DEX?  The pricing really falls apart if one adds +5 initiative with all actions (5 points) and +1 to any one agility skill at a time (6 points)  - you get less value than +5 DEX, but you only pay 10% more.  I submit that this is objectively not balanced.

[dekrass]

It seems that I have stumbled into another, much larger, debate here. Having barely been aware of HERO until a few months ago I don't have much context for a lot of this.

 

Do Dexterity rolls and skills and such come up more than other types in most games?

 

Is initiative really a major deciding factor in a lot of combats?

[TranquiloUno]

2 minutes ago, dekrass said:

It seems that I have stumbled into another, much larger, debate here. Having barely been aware of HERO until a few months ago I don't have much context for a lot of this.

 

Do Dexterity rolls and skills and such come up more than other types in most games?

 

 

I would say it's about the same (obviously it'll depend on the system and the group and the game) and that they come up fairly frequently. As happens in other games as well.

This is mostly due (IMO of course) to the "action" skills being mostly Dex based.

Since PCs tend to spend a fair amount of time: Sneaking, Hiding, Acrobatically leaping about, avoiding falling in to pits, fast drawing, picking locks, and so on those skills tend to have an outsized effect in the game because they come up more and because they usually involve PC danger\death.

 

Again, obviously this varies from game to game, player to player, system to system, and blah blah blah. But that's my general observation of RPGs over time. Sneaking is common and almost always "Dex"-based (whatever they call the stat) and usually\often hitting is Dex based as well.

Certainly in GURPS, WW, Palladium (not point buy, but...), D&D some others it's a powerful stat.

 

 

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, dekrass said:

 

Is initiative really a major deciding factor in a lot of combats?

 

Hard to say generally but it's about the only remaining usage for Dex in 6th that isn't Dex rolls.

Generally going first (or at least having the option to) is good in most games though.

 

Depending on what kind of Hero you are playing it could matter more or less.

If you're playing a higher lethality\lower armor type game (WW2, 'Nam, etc) then going first and hitting first, to provoke Stuns, can be very valuable.

 

In a mixed archetype classical Superhero game it might matter less.

 

 

[ghost-angel]

2 hours ago, dekrass said:

Do Dexterity rolls and skills and such come up more than other types in most games?

 

Is initiative really a major deciding factor in a lot of combats?

 

1) not in my experience.

 

2) I just spent an entire 2 year campaign playing a character with exactly 0 Offensive capability (But was a decent controller-type) and have decided unequivocally that initiative order matters very very little, and means less as combat progresses.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

12 minutes ago, ghost-angel said:

2) I just spent an entire 2 year campaign playing a character with exactly 0 Offensive capability (But was a decent controller-type) and have decided unequivocally that initiative order matters very very little, and means less as combat progresses.

Initiative matters if you absolutely have to go first, such as if you and your opponent can OHKO each other.  But that's a horrible game-state and shouldn't be a thing. 

Initiative matters because going before the opponent instead of after is a "free turn".  But HERO lets you buy "extra turn" in the form of SPD. 

So Initiative is never worth more than 10 points unless the GM's let the game balance get screwed up. 

[eepjr24]

16 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

Initiative matters if you absolutely have to go first, such as if you and your opponent can OHKO each other.  But that's a horrible game-state and shouldn't be a thing. 

Initiative matters because going before the opponent instead of after is a "free turn".  But HERO lets you buy "extra turn" in the form of SPD. 

So Initiative is never worth more than 10 points unless the GM's let the game balance get screwed up. 

In FH I find it matters more, especially for more ranged types who don't want to get into HTH range. I have players that don't buy up Dex, but do buy up lightning reflexes with their primary attack. I also have players who have a character concept that has them as faster than most and prefer Dex and some LR. I don't find Dex overpriced, but I can see how some people might. I think if I was to implement initiative as a characteristic I would start it at zero and just use LR to buy it up, disconnecting from Dex completely. And since I have a lot of ex-DnD players, I'd probably make it added to a d6 roll, with ties broken by LR level and then GM decision.

 

- E

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Is initiative really a major deciding factor in a lot of combats?

 

Probably not but for a good tactical player it can be a big advantage

[Hugh Neilson]

OK, let's say Player 1 spends, what, 40 points more on DEX so he can go first.  Player 2 spends those 40 extra points on PRE.  The two are otherwise identical.  Which one will act first if they are aware of each other?  Player 2 should make a PRE attack that rolls 8d6 more than Player 1 could roll.  That's an extra 28 points on average - take that on to 7 for a normal PRE (or a bit more than normal with a penalty for poor circumstances).  Who will actually act first?

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Who will actually act first?

 

The guy with the higher DEX.  Because he'll act before player 2 can make a presence attack.

[ghost-angel]

A PRE Attack takes No Time and thus may be performed at anytime, not even on your Phase. You can just declare to make a PRE Attack before the DEX Order even comes up. Assuming the PRE Attack does roll enough, which it will in Hugh's example, they will most certainly go first.