Speed and END

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

19 minutes ago, Grailknight said:

You are looking for ways to make higher SPD cost less END while ignoring the fact that higher SPD is definitely better than lower.

 

Glowbug doesn't have to last as long as Aegis because in one turn he accomplishes as much as Aegis does in three. 

 

Higher SPD is a choice and I've never before in a  thread seen it discussed a making a character weaker. In situations that require less END use, the higher SPD character can lower their SPD to conserve END. Not so, if the situation is reversed, the lower SPD is just left behind and SOL.

 

Perhaps some the higher SPD builds with these problems should change the way their powers are constructed rather than changing the rules of the game to help an edge case.

 

Sorry if this seems harsh, but it's very simple. Higher SPD is better than lower. That's why it costs more. The only drawback is END use so why would you take away the one thing that somewhat balances this?

The line of argument is that for many Constant powers, the benefit derived is independent of your SPD.  A 20 PD 20 ED Force Field costs 4*SPD END/Turn.  But the benefits of that Force Field have nothing to do with your SPD.  A SPD 2 character who gets hit six times and a SPD 6 character who gets hit six times have both been hit six times and thus benefited from that Force Field six times.  So since the benefits of the Force Field are independent of your SPD, the costs of the Force Field should be independent of your SPD. 

[Hugh Neilson]

4 minutes ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

The line of argument is that for many Constant powers, the benefit derived is independent of your SPD.  A 20 PD 20 ED Force Field costs 4*SPD END/Turn.  But the benefits of that Force Field have nothing to do with your SPD.  A SPD 2 character who gets hit six times and a SPD 6 character who gets hit six times have both been hit six times and thus benefited from that Force Field six times.  So since the benefits of the Force Field are independent of your SPD, the costs of the Force Field should be independent of your SPD. 

 

Does that mean that, if my character is a Speedster who uses primarily move through attacks, he would return to spending END for his force field every phase,, as he gets more benefits when he attacks (and takes reciprocal damage) than a similar character who attacks less often?

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

16 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Does that mean that, if my character is a Speedster who uses primarily move through attacks, he would return to spending END for his force field every phase,, as he gets more benefits when he attacks (and takes reciprocal damage) than a similar character who attacks less often?

I'm interested in hearing that response too. 

 

It's reasons like that that make me say I'm of the opinion that if END rules are to be changed, then a power that costs END should cost END when it provides benefit.  Force Fields costing END when they negate damage, DCV costing END when you get attacked, Regeneration costing END when it restores BODY, Damage Shields costing END when they do damage, etc. 

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

Love it when an argument opens with weasel words.  Seems like you are just looking for things to nitpick at.

 

Love it when any difference of opinion is dismissed as nitpicking.  Seems like many people would classify your concern about the unfairness of END use of constant powers by high SPD characters is itself a nitpick.

 

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

I don't really care about that.  I think Damage Shields are cheese, and almost never allow them -- precisely because they're supposed to be a defensive power, but always get cheesed into a zero-END attack power.  If you want a Damage Shield that can be used to make END-free attacks, buy it Reduced END.

 

Should Cannonball, who careens off his foes with Move Throughs, pay END every phase for his force field, under your system, because he is really using it to attack?  He uses it more often that other Force Field users, and in an offensive manner.

 

Many above have suggested that, if you want a constant power that does not cost more END for your high SPD, you can buy it using some variant of Reduced END as well.  Perhaps you have found the easy solution.

 

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

A forcefield is passive, holding on to someone is active.  It's really not that hard to understand.  If you don't want to pay END to hold some, use your casual strength and passively hold them.  Using your full strength implies you are actively preventing them from breaking free.  Since there's no such thing as "casual forcefield," I'm just assuming its always passive, unless you're pushing your force field, which I would just treat as normal, paid for phase by phase.

 

You're confusion seems to all stem from treating STR as a Constant power, which its not.  STR is its own thing.   Lifting an object is not a Constant Power.  It's an application of STR.  Stop treating the two as equivalent and suddenly none of the issue you are pretending exist exist.

 

First off, while I am flattered, I am not actually "confusion".  You may, however, dismiss this comment as ad homonym, if you wish.

 

More to the point, maintaining a field of force seems no more "active" and no more "constant" than holding a large object over one's head with STR, or maintaining a grip on a struggling opponent.  The latter two are merely Constant uses of STR.  Punching or Crushing an opponent are Instant applications of STR, while Lifting and Holding are Constant applications of that same STR.  The vehicle held over the Brick's head does not suddenly try to fall to earth every few seconds, nor does the opponent seek to escape only in a single burst of effort every few seconds.  These occurrences are Constant, but are resolved in Phases to enable the game to be divided into discrete, manageable components.

 

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

Sure.  Don't see how that's a problem.  One last desperate burst of power feels appropriate to almost all genres.

 

In almost all genres, those bursts require immediate effort, not "act now and exert effort later".

 

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

...but you'll be KO'd and at 0 END.

 

I'll be KOd at 0 END either way - firing off a pile of extra abilities maximizes my shot at achieving something before being KOd.

 

If I am at 1 STUN and 1 END, using up 25 END on Constant abilities, then being KOd to -11 STUN, seems way better than being KOd to -31 STUN by the average STUN from overspending my END.  BTW, you still have not, I think, answered the question of what happens if I use all than END on Phase 2, get KO'd on Phase 5, recover on Phase 8 and stay standing until PS 12.

 

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

There is no unfairness because the same is true for everyone else.  This is what's unfair (and completely nonsensical):

• Glowbug is a Noteworthy Normal with a SPD 6 and a Force Field that costs 5 END.
• Aegis is a Noteworthy Normal with a SPD 2 and a Force Field that costs 5 END.
• Both activate their Force Field is Segment 12.
• Assuming an average damage of 3.5 per 1d6, Glowbag is KO'd by exhaustion in Phase 2 of Turn 2, while Aegis is still burning END into Turn 3.
• If each takes a Recovery every action, Glowbug still burns 2 END a turn to maintain his Force Field, while Aegis pays nothing.

That really makes no sense at all. 

 

It is presently true that everyone else pays END for their powers on each of their phases.  You do not seem to consider that fair either.

 

In my view, it is no more and no less unfair (and completely nonsensical) than:

• Speedbug is a Noteworthy Normal with a SPD 6 and a 50 STR that costs 5 END.
• SlowPoke is a Noteworthy Normal with a SPD 2 and a 50 STR that costs 5 END.
• Both heft a large object, using full STR, over their heads in Segment 12.
• Assuming an average damage of 3.5 per 1d6, Speedbug is KO'd by exhaustion in Phase 2 of Turn 2, while SlowPoke is still burning END into Turn 3.

None of the four may take a Recovery every action - they are each spending 5 END per phase, which prevents taking a recovery as their action.

[massey]

I think it's entirely reasonable for constant powers to cost End every phase.  Not only does it make actually playing the game much simpler, but it makes a certain amount of sense in real life as well.

 

About six months ago, I decided to get into shape.  So I joined a Taekwondo gym (I went before as a kid and liked it) and have been going 2-3 times per week.  You know one of the toughest things for me?  When the class starts, you do various stretches, and then a bunch of practice kicks, and you count out loud in Korean.  I found that the simple act of counting makes it so much harder.  Normally counting is a 0 End activity, but trying to manage your breathing while you're in a deep stretch or doing a side kick, that wears me out faster than the kicking does.

 

Doing an additional task, even an easy one, while you're pushing yourself at a higher level of physical activity is very difficult.  If you just want to sit there all day with your Force Field on, that's pretty simple.  Voluntarily drop your Speed to 2 and have at it.  Captain Force Field (Speed 6) isn't operating at his full Speed when he's hanging around the base.  He only goes up to his normal Speed when he's flying, dodging, blasting, whatever.  Then he's moving as fast as he can, and the normal minimal level of exertion to keep his force field up becomes a lot more significant.

 

[Grailknight]

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

The line of argument is that for many Constant powers, the benefit derived is independent of your SPD.  A 20 PD 20 ED Force Field costs 4*SPD END/Turn.  But the benefits of that Force Field have nothing to do with your SPD.  A SPD 2 character who gets hit six times and a SPD 6 character who gets hit six times have both been hit six times and thus benefited from that Force Field six times.  So since the benefits of the Force Field are independent of your SPD, the costs of the Force Field should be independent of your SPD. 

 

So drop your SPD to 2 and see how effective you are while everyone else is at 6.  Having a SPD of 6 means that you need to construct your powers to fight at that SPD unless you have a theme of running out of END as a concept. The 6 SPD character hits the 2 SPD 4-6 times a turn and only takes 1 or 2 hits per turn in reply. Standing with 0 END is just better than unconscious because now you have  0 End and 0 STUN while I recover over your helpless body.

 

I do understand your principle though. But your change is even more unfair to the lower SPD characters. If you set END for constant powers at X SPD then anyone faster gets a break while slower pays more. A flat per turn cost will always favor the higher SPD. If you only spend END when you use the power, then the 6 SPD character uses up the 2 SPD character's END 3 times as quickly while only using 1/3 of what he'd use in a normal situation. Maybe 6 SPD  and 2 SPD characters just aren't equal and shouldn't be fighting each other.

[Guest Usagi]

On 11/8/2019 at 5:19 PM, Hugh Neilson said:

Should Cannonball, who careens off his foes with Move Throughs, pay END every phase for his force field, under your system, because he is really using it to attack?  He uses it more often that other Force Field users, and in an offensive manner.

I have no idea how you'd build Cannonball, but I don't really see how he is (or could) use a Force Field to attack.

 

On 11/8/2019 at 5:19 PM, Hugh Neilson said:

First off, while I am flattered, I am not actually "confusion".  You may, however, dismiss this comment as ad homonym, if you wish.

 Ad hominem?  No.  Pointing out typos isn't an attack on the person, it's just something people do when they have no actual arguments and are just trying to start a flame war.

 

Have fun with that.

 

EDIT: Actually, wait, I do want to address this:

On 11/8/2019 at 5:19 PM, Hugh Neilson said:

If I am at 1 STUN and 1 END, using up 25 END on Constant abilities...

This just strikes me as a ridiculous, desperate argument that is grasping at straws.  You're going to activate 250 active points worth of constant abilities?  And that's going to help you how?  I defy you to show us the character sheet where this is a real concern and not just specious nonsense.  I don't think I've ever even seen a character that could spend that much END on constant powers in one phase.  Even getting close to that amount would require a massively expensive character, and would still be the power-activation equivalent of opening every single tool on a swiss army knife at once -- might look cool, but it's never going to be useful or effective.

 

Seriously, all of your question feel like the real answer to them is "Don't design cheese characters." or "Don't play like a jerk."

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

I have no idea how you'd build Cannonball, but I don't really see how he is (or could) use a Force Field to attack.

 

By using the force field to avoid the damage he takes from his Move Through, he is gaining a benefit each time he attacks, and not just whenever someone attacks him.  While not directly used to inflict damage, the benefit of his force field increases with greater speed. 

 

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

 Ad hominem?  No.  Pointing out typos isn't an attack on the person, it's just something people do when they have no actual arguments and are just trying to start a flame war.

 

Have fun with that.

 

I was actually having fun with that, however it appears I may be too subtle for this crowd, to quote Rodney Dangerfield.  Perhaps looking up the word "homonym" might be of some assistance.  A good pun is, after all, its own reword.

 

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

EDIT: Actually, wait, I do want to address this:

This just strikes me as a ridiculous, desperate argument that is grasping at straws.  You're going to activate 250 active points worth of constant abilities?  And that's going to help you how?  I defy you to show us the character sheet where this is a real concern and not just specious nonsense.  I don't think I've ever even seen a character that could spend that much END on constant powers in one phase.  Even getting close to that amount would require a massively expensive character, and would still be the power-activation equivalent of opening every single tool on a swiss army knife at once -- might look cool, but it's never going to be useful or effective.

 

Seriously, all of your question feel like the real answer to them is "Don't design cheese characters." or "Don't play like a jerk."

 

No, it doesn't really feel like you want to address any suggestions that your concept may be less than perfect.  However, my math fell well short as well, given it is impossible to spend 25 END on constant powers under your model, where I pay 2x the END on a per turn basis.  That's either 120 or 130 AP (for 24 or 26 END).  Three 40 AP powers hardly seems impossible.  Of course, as the issues you choose to ignore indicate, this depends on which abilities we classify as "constant".

 

I can activate my +20/+20 rDEF force field, seek to englobe my target in a 60 AP Force Wall this phase (which, as it costs END to maintain, is a Constant power) and bring in my Triggered wall of fog (that smokescreen that started off the whole thread) using my 60 AP Change Environment.  That's 3 60 AP powers, so 6 END x 3 powers, doubled since I am paying under your "per turn" model, so 36 END, and I did not really have to think that hard to come up with three Constant powers.  Since I do not spend END for these benefits up front, I can use my END for movement, Strength to carry something, or numerous other uses.  Hopefully, I win before the end of the turn (in which case no big deal if the END catches up with me), with my next choice being just lightly KOd so I get out of spending the END at all.

 

To clarify, assume I used enough constant powers last turn to pay 24 END in PS 12.  If I have 1 STUN and 1 END, do I take the full 11 1/2d6 STUN when a character with 1 less STUN, who is KOd, will not lose any STUN from the same END usage earlier in the turn?  That sounds far more unfair than the 6 SPD character spending END faster than the 4 SPD character.

 

I'll close by noting that good game rules need to consider a wide variety of play styles, many of which will differ from your own.

[Guest Usagi]

2 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I can activate my +20/+20 rDEF force field, seek to englobe my target in a 60 AP Force Wall this phase (which, as it costs END to maintain, is a Constant power) and bring in my Triggered wall of fog (that smokescreen that started off the whole thread) using my 60 AP Change Environment.

Right, right, we're late into the combat and you're only now activating your Force Field.  That's super plausible.  Oh, and then look, two Attack powers.  Maybe try applying some common sense.  Your questions are obnoxious, it's like you want me to think for you.  Like I said, the real solution to your questions is don't play like a dick.  Also:

6 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

No, it doesn't really feel like you want to address any suggestions that your concept may be less than perfect.

When did I ever say my suggestion was perfect?  Please, show me the quote.  You got issues, man.  I have no idea why you are being so aggressive and obnoxious towards me.  You have something against new users?  Is this like pissing to mark your territory?  Because you are being super hostile.

 

4 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

I'll close by noting that good game rules need to consider a wide variety of play styles, many of which will differ from your own.

If you need a bulletproof system that can't be abused without the GM applying common sense and reason, then HERO is the wrong game for you.

 

Whatever, I'm done talking to you.  Any further discussion is pointless, because I am 100% convinced you're just trying to start a flame war.

[Doc Democracy]

1 hour ago, Usagi said:

Whatever, I'm done talking to you.  Any further discussion is pointless, because I am 100% convinced you're just trying to start a flame war.

 

You are new here, Neil is never trying to start a flame war but he is quite dedicated to examining suggestions on rules and whether they work or not.

 

He has been engaging with the topic and taking your suggestion seriously enough to look at it and test it to destruction. 

 

I understand you are feeling like he is attacking you and your idea, I just want to assure you that as someone who has shared these boards with him for over 15 years, that is not what is happening.

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

7 hours ago, Usagi said:

Right, right, we're late into the combat and you're only now activating your Force Field.  That's super plausible.  Oh, and then look, two Attack powers.  Maybe try applying some common sense.  Your questions are obnoxious, it's like you want me to think for you.  Like I said, the real solution to your questions is don't play like a dick.  Also:

 

When did I ever say my suggestion was perfect?  Please, show me the quote.  You got issues, man.  I have no idea why you are being so aggressive and obnoxious towards me.  You have something against new users?  Is this like pissing to mark your territory?  Because you are being super hostile.

 

If you need a bulletproof system that can't be abused without the GM applying common sense and reason, then HERO is the wrong game for you.

 

Whatever, I'm done talking to you.  Any further discussion is pointless, because I am 100% convinced you're just trying to start a flame war.

 

Your response to every question on your proposed rules change is either an insult or simply ignoring the issue.  That suggests a sense that your suggestion was perfect.

 

I see that I’m the “hostile dick” being “aggressive and obnoxious” to “mark my territory” because I have issues “against new users”.  It seems like I have a lot more basis to take offense (which I do not, to be clear) than you do, but YMMV.  Sorry for whatever makes you feel that way – clearly something set you off, but I don’t see it.

 

A player does not have to be “a dick” to build a construct which is excessively powerful, any more than a GM has to be “a dick” to have a player fall into a “system trap” resulting in an ineffective character (like a high SPD, but not enough END to get through a turn). 

 

Specifically, you find my use of attack powers as examples inappropriate, yet the OP’s first example, Darkness in the form of a smoke grenade, is an attack power.  Would that remain an “END per phase” power under your model?  I can’t read your mind, only what you type and post.  In any case, you’re not reading my posts any more, so the odds of any question being addressed rather than dismissed or ignored has declined a bit further (it didn’t have much further to decline anyway…).

 

Just in case anyone else is interested in discussing the possibilities, I think the original question has evolved into multiple issues.

 

Should END be paid for Constant powers (or a subset thereof) per phase, or for fixed time periods?

 

The OP began with the suggestion that a per phase END cost for Constant powers penalizes high SPD characters.  The proposed answer was to convert this to some type of per turn END cost.  Gnome noted that the line of argument is that for many Constant powers, the benefit derived is independent of your SPD, which suggests we need to create some new subset of powers which are constant, but whose benefits are independent of SPD, not simply apply this to all Constant powers, which Usagi seems to be in agreement with.

 

My take on this is that it is a reasonable question, but perhaps one where any solution creates more problems than it is worth, including more things to track/required bookkeeping.  We do have other solutions.  Charges allow for Continuing Charges by moving up the table.  If we assume the default is 1 phase, then a +1/4 advantage could mean 2 phases, and +1/4 for each extra step up the chart.  However, given one could buy 0 END for +1/2, that seems pricy, and  continuing charges bring in an element of Persistence along with lasting longer.  I don’t think it answers all the issues,  but it could also be used to add an element of time-limited Persistence to powers like smoke grenades, tear gas, etc.

 

For +1/4, I can buy “END only to activate”.  Why not “END only once per turn” for the same +1/4?  You get to turn it on and off as much as you like in that turn, but may have to spend some more END next turn, so it seems roughly balanced with “Only to activate”.

 

These existing tools, with a bit of tinkering, seem capable of resolving the issue on a character by character basis, so I am not sold that it is worth dealing with the added complexities for any further benefits we would obtain.

 

Which Powers?

 

So which Constant powers fall on which side of the line?  Looking solely at powers which default to both Constant and costing END by default, we have:

 

-          Change Environment *

-          Clairsentience

-          Darkness *

-          Density Increase

-          Desolidification

-           Growth

-          Images *

-          Invisibility

-          Mind Scan *

-          Shape Shift

-          Shrinking

-          Stretching

-          Telekinesis *

 

* attack powers.  As TK is Constant, and is nothing more than STR, this also supports the view that STR, or at least some uses of STR, is also a Constant ability.

 

I have left the Movement powers off of the above list, as I think we would all agree that moving further reasonably costs more END.

 

Deflection is Instant, but in that multiple Blocks can be made, it has elements of Constant. 

 

Oddly, Mind Scan is Constant, but other mental powers with lasting effects are not.  In particular, these can be extended without the usual bonuses to the roll if the attacker pays END every phase.  That seems like a Constant element to those powers.

 

The waters are further muddied when we apply the Constant advantage, or make a Constant (or Persistent) power cost END. 

 

How often should END be paid?

 

One suggestion is twice per turn.  The higher the campaign SPD (and specific character SPD) goes, the more advantageous this becomes to high SPD characters.  I believe it would be less of an issue in Heroic games, were SPD 4 tends to be the cap, than in Supers games where anything less than 5 is a snail or a turtle compared to typical PCs and their adversaries.

 

A second, from Gnome, was “when the power does something”.  That has real merits as well, although it seems like it makes any power that costs END and activates when I am attacked very problematic.  Hit that target with an Autofire of small attacks, for example, to get an effect much like an END drain.   An AoE attack does not cost more END based on hitting multiple targets.

 

When should END be paid?

 

This is the most significant issue I have with Usagi’s model.  The END cost should be paid when the benefits are received, not deferred to some later point in time.  In addition to the game benefit, it seems counterintuitive that I would not get tired setting up my Force Field or Darkness field, but that I would get tired a bit later from having done that, even if I already shut it off.  I would not be inclined to let an Attack be purchased with “pays the END at the end of the turn”, and other powers are no different.

[massey]

On 11/2/2019 at 6:18 PM, Usagi said:

It seems to me that it would be reasonable to shift the END cost of constant powers to Post-Segment 12, and to use a flat cost of (END)2 for all Constant powers.  That way a SPD 12 character with a Force Field is paying the same END cost for their Force Field that a SPD 2 character is paying, which seems fair since they are getting the exact same amount of protection.  I'm basing it off SPD 2 because, well, obviously, SPD 2 is the base speed of all things-with-speed.

 

For simplicity, I would also have the cost be (END)2 regardless of how many Phases the character actually uses the power.  For example, if a character turns on all their Constant defense powers on Segment 12 of Turn 0 (the segment on which all combats start), they'd pay the full cost of the power even though they didn't use the power for 2 Phases before Post-Segment 12.

 

I'd also make the order of events in Post-Segment 12:

1. Pay END to Maintain Powers
2. Apply any STUN damage caused by END overcharging
3. Recover STUN and END unless Stunned

 

The biggest problem is that the cost of powers in the game is not structured with this in mind.  Zero End is a +1/2 advantage because you are normally spending End every time you use the power.  Change Constant powers so that they only pay End as if you were Speed 2, and it becomes far far cheaper to just buy a little extra End and not worry about it.  You break the cost structure of the game if you do that.

[Guest Usagi]

6 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Your response to every question on your proposed rules change is either an insult or simply ignoring the issue. 

I have not insulted you once.  You, on the other hand, have badgered me with inane questions, picked on my typos, and constantly attributed attitudes to me insinuate I'm the jerk for not wanting to deal with your pestering.  If you're interested in a conversation, you're going about it in the absolute worst way possible.  Cause Hugh, I don't know you from Adam, but I am already 100% sick of your shit and tired of you.

 

OP said he doesn't like the way SPD and END interact.  I offered him an alternative.  I never said it was perfect or wouldn't cause other issues in outlier situations (like the inane scenarios you've suggested).  For some reason this pissed you off and you have been riding my ass ever since, and when you decided to point out a typo and mock it (which is pathetic, by the way), I decided I was absolutely done bothering with you.  You're not a nice person, you're being an ass, and I really wish the ignore function worked.  Why don't you just stop?  You wrote that whole wall of text to someone who explicitly told you they weren't interested in the discussion.   I'm not going to read it.  You wasted all that effort for nothing.  You should ask yourself why you did that, you mighty learn something about yourself.

[Hugh Neilson]

Sorry to disappoint, Usagi, but I don't often post for one reader.  Most of that post is actually my summary of the questions and issues the suggested changes raise, a lot identified by other posters on the thread.  It's a discussion, not a two person dialogue.

[MrAgdesh]

On 11/9/2019 at 2:53 AM, massey said:

I found that the simple act of counting makes it so much harder.  Normally counting is a 0 End activity, but trying to manage your breathing while you're in a deep stretch or doing a side kick, that wears me out faster than the kicking does.

 

 

Try playing Kabaddi.

[Surrealone]

On 11/10/2019 at 1:51 AM, Usagi said:

Whatever, I'm done talking to you.  Any further discussion is pointless, because I am 100% convinced you're just trying to start a flame war.

Hugh is about as logical and objective as they come when it comes to Hero System.  He'll dig in and defend his stance, but it's never personal.  I say this as someone who does the same … often with viewpoints that oppose Hugh's … so I've debated with him off and on through the years. (I suppose I like to be contrary a fair bit … as it makes for interesting debate?) 

 

I advise not writing the man off or blocking him, as you'll miss out on some interesting and worthwhile content, perspectives, and logic with respect to Hero System if you do.  It is, of course, your call...