6th Ed Deadly Blow/Weapon Master Cost Math?

[Tywyll]

Can someone help me wrap my head around the actual build for Deadly Blow/Weapon Master in 6th edition? What values are being used? I assume it's purchased as CSL, only for damage...but the pricing seems way off.

 

For the 12 point level, like Daggermaster, it seems like that would be 6 3 point levels, only for damage modifier. That seems costed at a -1/2 limitation, but since you are losing 2/3rds of the utility of the skill level (going from 3 uses to only 1) that seems like it ought to be a -1 1/2 limitation.

 

Is this just 'only versus fire' all over again (i.e. under valuing certain limitations)?

[Lee]

From 6E1 p 447:

Quote

Deadly Blow Cost: Six 8-point Combat Skill Levels with these Limitations: Only To Increase Damage (-½), Only With Weapons (-½), and a -2,-1, or -½ Limitation defining the circumstances.

 

HTH

[Tywyll]

1 hour ago, Lee said:

From 6E1 p 447:

 

HTH

 

Ah, cool, thank you.

 

Now why? Why use an 8 point level with a large limitation when a 3 or a 5 point level would cover the actual cost sans limitations? Because 3 and 5 point levels don't derive from limited 8 point levels (the 3 point levels round up one a one to one basis, but not more than 2, and the 5 point level can't be costed with that limitation)?

 

Compare to MA DC which just cost 4 points each.

[Grailknight]

2 hours ago, Tywyll said:

 

Ah, cool, thank you.

 

Now why? Why use an 8 point level with a large limitation when a 3 or a 5 point level would cover the actual cost sans limitations? Because 3 and 5 point levels don't derive from limited 8 point levels (the 3 point levels round up one a one to one basis, but not more than 2, and the 5 point level can't be costed with that limitation)?

 

Compare to MA DC which just cost 4 points each.

 

The use of 8 point levels is to make it apply to all types of ranged/melee weapons and the differing Limitation levels are the way the weapon categories are narrowed down. 

 

Martial Arts Dc's are the most under-priced component of the game and an entire new topic should address them.

[Tywyll]

1 hour ago, Grailknight said:

 

The use of 8 point levels is to make it apply to all types of ranged/melee weapons and the differing Limitation levels are the way the weapon categories are narrowed down. 

 

Martial Arts Dc's are the most under-priced component of the game and an entire new topic should address them.

 

Yeah, but... CSLsalready accomplish that. It seems a weird design choice. Why pay for an 8 point level with a -2 limitation, Only with Daggers when you could just buy 3 point levels to accomplish it?

[dsatow]

Not every option usable in HERO will be cost efficient with something else.  That's why there are build arguments.

[Duke Bushido]

Who wants to hear a long rant on why the whole "martial arts" as a special category is just plain stupid?!  

 

Really?  Nobody?

 

 

_FINE_........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

11 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

Who wants to hear a long rant on why the whole "martial arts" as a special category is just plain stupid?!  

 

Really?  Nobody?

 

 

_FINE_........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Doesn't every second poster have their own rant on that subject? 

[L. Marcus]

... Did Duke not rant just then?

[Tywyll]

So is anything going to break if this build is ignored in favor of using lesser CSLs instead?

 

Also, I guess I'm unfamiliar with the MA arguements. 4 points for a MA DC vs 5 points for a Str based DC makes them seem overpriced if anything to me. Anyone point me at a high level break down of that argument (not wanting to rehash it, just curious what it is?). 

 

For the record I much prefer the current MA system to the original one (STR multiplier) but I do agree it's grossly cost efficient, to the point I have a hard time building a character without some kind of MA. 

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

8 minutes ago, Tywyll said:

So is anything going to break if this build is ignored in favor of using lesser CSLs instead?

 

Also, I guess I'm unfamiliar with the MA arguements. 4 points for a MA DC vs 5 points for a Str based DC makes them seem overpriced if anything to me. Anyone point me at a high level break down of that argument (not wanting to rehash it, just curious what it is?). 

 

For the record I much prefer the current MA system to the original one (STR multiplier) but I do agree it's grossly cost efficient, to the point I have a hard time building a character without some kind of MA. 

A MADC is a DC, 0END.  Normally that costs 7.  You pay 4.  So "Only with MA" is a pretty big Limitation! 

But a Weapon Element is 1.  So you buy whatever-fu, buy Weapon Element: My Attack, and buy MADCs to get cheaper damage that costs less END.  It's both cheaper and better than buying normal damage normally. 

Because as it turns out, "Only with MA" isn't limiting at all.  And that's not even getting into how MADCs apply to anything, so you can take them outside a MP and cut the slot prices while retaining flexibility. 

[Tywyll]

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

A MADC is a DC, 0END.  Normally that costs 7.  You pay 4.  So "Only with MA" is a pretty big Limitation! 

But a Weapon Element is 1.  So you buy whatever-fu, buy Weapon Element: My Attack, and buy MADCs to get cheaper damage that costs less END.  It's both cheaper and better than buying normal damage normally. 

Because as it turns out, "Only with MA" isn't limiting at all.  And that's not even getting into how MADCs apply to anything, so you can take them outside a MP and cut the slot prices while retaining flexibility. 

 

Well, I suppose I see that, but I'm not sure I agree with the initial statement. 5 points of Strength, 0 END, does cost 7. But Strength gives you a bunch of different value beyond pure damage, including encumbrance, the occasional str roll, etc.  And of course prior to the newest edition it also gave you figured characteristics. Removing that alone would reduce the cost 4.6. Assuming 'Only with MA' was a -1/4 limitation, plus no figured characteristics, you do end up with 4. That barely accounts for the loss of Strength's other benefits (at least at a heroic level). 

 

But yeah, I can see how they could be abused if the GM wasn't careful. 

[Tywyll]

Back to the main point, do people who allow weapon master and deadly blow ever consider doing what I suggested (lower cost CSLs, Only for Damage limitation)?

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

1 hour ago, Tywyll said:

 

Well, I suppose I see that, but I'm not sure I agree with the initial statement. 5 points of Strength, 0 END, does cost 7. But Strength gives you a bunch of different value beyond pure damage, including encumbrance, the occasional str roll, etc.  And of course prior to the newest edition it also gave you figured characteristics. Removing that alone would reduce the cost 4.6. Assuming 'Only with MA' was a -1/4 limitation, plus no figured characteristics, you do end up with 4. That barely accounts for the loss of Strength's other benefits (at least at a heroic level). 

 

But yeah, I can see how they could be abused if the GM wasn't careful. 

Justify "Only with MA" as -1/4.  It's not worth that much. 

And you're ignoring them being floating DCs that can apply to, for example, Energy Blast.  If you've got a way to pull 1d6 EB 0END down to 4 real I'd love to hear it. 

[Hugh Neilson]

2 hours ago, Tywyll said:

 

Well, I suppose I see that, but I'm not sure I agree with the initial statement. 5 points of Strength, 0 END, does cost 7. But Strength gives you a bunch of different value beyond pure damage, including encumbrance, the occasional str roll, etc.  And of course prior to the newest edition it also gave you figured characteristics. Removing that alone would reduce the cost 4.6. Assuming 'Only with MA' was a -1/4 limitation, plus no figured characteristics, you do end up with 4. That barely accounts for the loss of Strength's other benefits (at least at a heroic level).

 

First, Figured were never appropriately balanced.  Dropping them, and rationalizing the price of Figured's, was a good step forward.  Buying more REC and END is now a viable alternative to slapping Reduced END on everything.  More STUN and REC is not automatically dismissed in favour of higher defenses either.

 

Hand Attack also needs to be factored into the equation.  An MA DC can add to maneuvers that do much more than damage, and cost 0 END.  Given we now have the deadly  blow and weapon master constructs, perhaps it is time to eliminate Martial Arts DCs and fold them in to that model.

[Vanguard]

1 hour ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

And you're ignoring them being floating DCs that can apply to, for example, Energy Blast

 

Since when can you add a MADC to EB?

 

That may be RAW but we've never used it.  We've always ruled that it only applies to your actual martial arts (meaning actual martial arts maneuvers).  If you've purchased a "martial arts chi trick" that's built as an EB, you don't get to add the MADCs to it.  That's WAY too efficient . . . and cheesy.

[Tywyll]

2 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

 

Since when can you add a MADC to EB?

 

That may be RAW but we've never used it.  We've always ruled that it only applies to your actual martial arts (meaning actual martial arts maneuvers).  If you've purchased a "martial arts chi trick" that's built as an EB, you don't get to add the MADCs to it.  That's WAY too efficient . . . and cheesy.

 

I'm pretty sure it's in both the 5th and 6th edition UMA books.

[Tywyll]

1 hour ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

Justify "Only with MA" as -1/4.  It's not worth that much. 

And you're ignoring them being floating DCs that can apply to, for example, Energy Blast.  If you've got a way to pull 1d6 EB 0END down to 4 real I'd love to hear it. 

 

I already did. Strength gives damage, encumbrance, escapes, holds, and skill rolls.

 

MA DCs only give Damage and possibly escapes and possibly holds depending on maneuvers. It is objectively worth less. 

 

And again, the price scale was built when STR also gave figured characteristics. When can point to it now and say it doesn't work, but at the time they were costed, it very much was a thing. 

[Vanguard]

1 minute ago, Tywyll said:

 

I'm pretty sure it's in both the 5th and 6th edition UMA books.

 

Thanks.  Must have missed it.

[Tywyll]

Back to the main point, do people who allow weapon master and deadly blow ever consider doing what I suggested (lower cost CSLs, Only for Damage limitation)?

[Ninja-Bear]

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

A MADC is a DC, 0END.  Normally that costs 7.  You pay 4.  So "Only with MA" is a pretty big Limitation! 

But a Weapon Element is 1.  So you buy whatever-fu, buy Weapon Element: My Attack, and buy MADCs to get cheaper damage that costs less END.  It's both cheaper and better than buying normal damage normally. 

Because as it turns out, "Only with MA" isn't limiting at all.  And that's not even getting into how MADCs apply to anything, so you can take them outside a MP and cut the slot prices while retaining flexibility. 

Really? First all you have to buy minimum of 10 CP out the gate. Second what styles are available and how strict is the GM with maneuver description? I.e. just because I bought weapon element:  blades for my Karate doesn’t mean I get to use my Offensive Strike with it cause that is defined as a Spinning Kick. Most maneuvers can have positive OCV and or DCV but then they usually have a negative OCV/DCV also. Oh so Extra DC adds to maneuvers? And? Let’s take NND. It takes two extra DC to increase it by one Die. Second on that you know what doesn’t add to NND? STR. Grind can buy a choke hold and still only does 2D6 NND. You can buy NND on a HA get to add X amount of STR for free (depending on size of HA) and you suffer no penalty as a martial maneuver. Let’s not forget that most campaigns use standard rules for KB so a martial maneuver rolls one more die of KB. That may not a big deal per se but I just gamed and the GM (long time player) felt that that didn’t sit right with Shamrock. (He used the 5th ed version which has him having Boxing MA). One more thought about maneuvers, just because they are book legal, doesn’t mean that the GM will allow them. I’m looking at you Flying Dodge! 

[Ninja-Bear]

3 minutes ago, Tywyll said:

Back to the main point, do people who allow weapon master and deadly blow ever consider doing what I suggested (lower cost CSLs, Only for Damage limitation)?

I haven’t used them as of yet. I’m working on a game that may allow it. The allowance is more because the GM is new so builds are really going to be basic not do the build itself.  
 

What do you hope to achieve with lowering the cost?

[Ninja-Bear]

And another point about raw STR vs MA DC. MA DC isn’t supposed to be used to break things like say a bank vault door even if you have the DC to do so.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Really? First all you have to buy minimum of 10 CP out the gate. Second what styles are available and how strict is the GM with maneuver description? I.e. just because I bought weapon element:  blades for my Karate doesn’t mean I get to use my Offensive Strike with it cause that is defined as a Spinning Kick. Most maneuvers can have positive OCV and or DCV but then they usually have a negative OCV/DCV also. Oh so Extra DC adds to maneuvers? And? Let’s take NND. It takes two extra DC to increase it by one Die. Second on that you know what doesn’t add to NND? STR. Grind can buy a choke hold and still only does 2D6 NND. You can buy NND on a HA get to add X amount of STR for free (depending on size of HA) and you suffer no penalty as a martial maneuver. Let’s not forget that most campaigns use standard rules for KB so a martial maneuver rolls one more die of KB. That may not a big deal per se but I just gamed and the GM (long time player) felt that that didn’t sit right with Shamrock. (He used the 5th ed version which has him having Boxing MA). One more thought about maneuvers, just because they are book legal, doesn’t mean that the GM will allow them. I’m looking at you Flying Dodge! 

10 points of MA maneuvers is a good investment for everyone because MA scaling is screwed up beyond belief, so that's not really a hindrance. 

The GM can veto anything, and should veto abusive constructs.  But that doesn't make those constructs any less abusive, the GM being able to fix the problem just means there is a problem. 

[PhilFleischmann]

Back before 6e, there was a discussion here in which I made the case that STR should cost 2 points, HA should be 5 points per die, and MA DCs should cost 6 points each.  With the removal of figured characteristics, the STR cost issue is resolved.  In 4e HA cost 3 points, because it needed to be cheaper than 5 points of STR.  In 5e, this became 3.333 points (5 points with an arbitrary "HA limitation") for the same reason.  And MA DCs needed to cost more than HA, because they do more and don't cost END.  So they cost 4 points.  What does HA cost now, in 6e?  5 points per d6?  Great!  Then MA DCs should cost 6 points.