Warp9

Re: movement

I have the whole thing precoded into a spread sheet for quick reference. I have a human as:

 

Move: 6"

NCM Mult. 4

SPD 2

MPH: 17.9

KPH: 29.0 (assuming I did the KPH calc right. )

I always thought the default NCM was 2. But perhaps it has been too long since I looked at the rules.

On the KPH thing. . . . Since we are dealing with 1 hex = 2 meters, KPH is pretty easy to figure:

meters per second X 3,600 then divide by 1,000 to get km.

Re: movement

ok in a heroic game a character got 6 base movement right? and a hex = 2 meters rights? my question is it is realistic in a phase who that suppose to be one seconde a character can run 24 meters..........let see you got a character with 6 base move and at is phase he decide to run for is life and use is full move of 12 with 0 ocv and 0 dcv at the end of is phase ( one second) he is at 12 hex away (for 24 meters).......hum it is possible ?? i mean in a heroic context?

hope i am clear

english not my first language

stef

You move on each phase, not on each segment.

You get a number of phases per turn equal to your SPD stat.

A normal person has a SPD of 2.

Thus, a normal person has 2 phases in a Turn, which means 2 moves per 12 seconds.

A normal person moves 6 hexes per phase.

2 moves of 6 hexes means a move of 12 hexes per turn.

12 hexes in 12 seconds = 1 hex per second, or 2 meters per second.

2 meters per second is the same as 7.2 km per hour (2 meters X 3,600 seconds = 7,200 meters).

7.2 km per hour is not all that fast.

You can double that if you are using noncombat speeds---which is 14.4 kmh.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

OK. So *theoretically* someone could perform a series of tests (which no one ever has or ever will, either in the game world, or the real world) under certain controlled conditions (which pretty much invalidate the test for combat conditions) and quantify the likelihood of hitting a target. The point of which would be what? With STR lifting capacity, it's pretty easy to measure, in the game world and in the real world: weigh the object, can you lift it or not. CV on the other hand is only one part of the equation. The target has a DCV which must be factored in, and then you have Range Mod, Size Mod, CSLs (on both sides), Maneuver bonuses and penalties (on both sides), Set, Brace, Environmental modifiers, etc.

If I was the leader of a team of superheroes, I might want to have a handle on the exact offensive abilities of my team. And, if I had some kind of ultra-high tech "danger-room" to work with, it should be possible to control conditions, and run all sorts of test in regard to these matters. For OCV, I could find out each character's chance to hit a range of targets, and do it under controlled conditions to factor out such things as range mod, size mod, environmental modifiers, etc. . . .

With the right type of set-up, I believe that it should be possible to get a pretty good handle on each character's offensive and defensive abilities.

I'm not sure it will help, but here goes:

Hitting the target a lot more often, being hit a lot less often (assuming an opponent with a reasonably close CV). That is what the game mechanics numbers mean from the character's point of view.

I was trying to go for the concept that there is IMO a major difference between a 6 OCV, and a 12 OCV.

OK. I understand what you mean now, but I still don't see the point. What would you call the "pre-scaled numbers" that correspond to the "post-scaled" CV? I don't think there are any. There's only, "Character A is a little bit better shot than character B," or "Character A is a lot better shot than character B," or "Character A blows character B out of the water in terms of combat accuracy." But even in these cases, it depends on the circumstances of the combat. 6 OCV vs 12 OCV makes a big difference against a 9 DCV, but it makes no difference against a 0 DCV or a 20 DCV or more.

 

In short, what's your point?

I do have some ideas about the pre-scaled numbers in terms of CV; however, I'd like to give the matter a bit more thought before I make any specific comments in that area.

In any case, I assumed that you were probably refering to "post-scaled" numbers in terms of CV, but I wanted to be sure.

I also wanted to make the point that there is a difference between the values, in terms of game mechanics, and the impact that is felt in the game world from the perspective on the characters.

Looking at some other "post scaled data" for a moment. . . .

Imagine a 10 point gap in Hero lifting STR (say, for example, the gap between 10 lift STR and 20 lift STR, or the gap between 30 lift STR and 40 lift STR). Would that 10 point gap be an absolute difference or a relative difference?

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

Yes, because the weight of objects is easily measurable in the game world. If a character increases STR, he can say, fully in-character, "Wow! Look how much weight I can lift now! I used to be able to lift 25 tons, but now I can lift 100 tons."

 

However, there is no such measurement with regard to CV, or to many other game-mechanics rules within the game world. The character isn't going to say, "I used to punch for 10d6, but now I punch for 12d6!" See also, my example from my previous post about "I will hit you 74% of the time!"

I'm not saying that it would be easy, but, with enough experimentation/testing, my character could find out that he is able to hit some target 74% of the time.

You may not believe it' date=' but, [i']even though the characters are not aware of the actual game mechanic point values[/i], those values *DO* have an impact on the game world.

In that sense, yes, but only a few of them do. Lifting capacity obviously does, and movement speed. That's about it. Maybe certain levels of defense ("I can bounce bullets up to ___-caliber."), but even that starts to break down, which you can see from the many discussions there have been on supers vs. tanks, etc.

I would say that the game mechanic values have an impact on the game world--and more than just a few of them.

Lifting and movement speed are just easier for the characters to see, but, with enough of the right tests, the impacts of those other values should make themselves felt.

So, to put it in your terms, with CV:

Game Mechanic terms: increasing +1 CV, and thus going from 3 OCV and DCV to 4 OCV and DCV. (Again, this isn't really game mechanics, just arithmetic, but I'm keeping it in the terms you used.)

 

Game World terms (From the Character's POV): Hitting the target a little more often, being hit a little less often. That is what the game mechanics numbers mean from the character's point of view.

So how about going from 6 OCV to 12 OCV? (lets also assume that we are dealing with a 6 DCV target)

What would that change in OCV mean in Game World terms?

Also, I'd like to address something from a different post. . . .

There is a huge difference between those things; it is the difference between working with “post-scaled” numbers and “pre-scaled” numbers.

I have no idea what you mean by this statement. It appears to be meaningless.

Well, in some sense, all numbers are in one scale or another, so perhaps I should have put it a bit differently.

However, what I meant is as follows:

If a player comes to me and says: "I'd like to have a character who can lift 100,000 kg." That is what I would call "pre-scaled data." It is obviously in a metric scale, but it is not yet in terms that the game mechanics use.

I explain to this player that: "100,000 kg lift (100 metric tons) = 60 STR in game terms," he then writes down that 60 STR on his character sheet. That 60 STR is "post-scaled data," it represents a number which has been translated into game mechanics terms.

If somebody hits that 60 STR character with a STR drain, and he drops to 50 STR, that value is still what I would define as "post scaled data." But that 10 point STR drop means nothing to the characters: they don't know what a 50 STR means.

In order to put this STR drop in terms which are understandable to the characters we must "un-scale" it. In game world terms, a 50 STR means a lift capacity of 25,000 kg (25 metric tons). That "un-scaled" 25,000kg lift is what I would call "pre-scaled data"

I don't know if that is clear or not. If it is not clear then I will try to explain some more.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

Are you talking about the absolute difference in "raw" Combat Value numbers in "game mechanics" terms? Or are you talking about what those numbers actually mean to the characters within the game world?

I'm talking in game mechanics terms - that's the only thing relevent to the discussion and the only reason for enumerating the scales. The numbers don't mean *anything at all* "within the game world". Squirrelman, Captain Crowbar, Doctor Impossible have no concept of "OCV" or "pips of STUN and BODY". I am reminded of a player I had decades ago when I used to play (and DM) D&D: whenever I would describe the players coming upon a monster, he would say, "How many hit points does it have?" As if dragons wear signs around their necks that say, "Hello, my name is Vermicelli and I have 86 hit points." Or as if you can go to an "adventurer's supply store" in the village and buy a "hit-point-ometer".

I'm not asking you what the characters think of the points values, I'm asking you what impact those points have on their world.

Example:

Game Mechanic terms: increasing +10 points of STR, and thus going from 50 STR to 60 STR.

Game World terms (From the Character's POV): Going from lifting 25 tons to lifting 100 tons. That is what the game mechanics numbers mean from the character's point of view.

You may not believe it, but, even though the characters are not aware of the actual game mechanic point values, those values *DO* have an impact on the game world.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

In Hero' date=' the relative difference between 1 OCV vs 2 DCV is exactly the same as the relative difference between 3 OCV vs 4 DCV. All I have to do is ask which progression that fits. [/quote']

No. It's the *absolute* difference that's the same. And it's the *absolute* difference that matters in HERO.

Are you talking about the absolute difference in "raw" Combat Value numbers in "game mechanics" terms? Or are you talking about what those numbers actually mean to the characters within the game world?

 

There is a huge difference between those things; it is the difference between working with “post-scaled” numbers and “pre-scaled” numbers.

 

 

Generally speaking, often times in is helpful to convert world values (“world” could be "game-world" or "real world" depending on the situation) to some scale. Once they have been scaled, you can then work with them (this is where the game mechanics comes into play). After that, you can then convert them back to world values.

 

In game mechanics terms, we are working with differences in OCV and DCV, but what does a 1 point gap in CV actually represent within in the game world?

 

Would the characters in the game describe going from 10 CV to 20 CV as a “doubling” of combat effectiveness? Or would they likely describe such an increase as a much greater increase in combat ability?

 

That is where the question of scale comes into the picture.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

Again, in as simple terms as I can think of:

 

Linear progression: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 98 99 100 101

In absolute terms: the first two entries differ by 1, the last two entries differ by 1.

In relative terms: the first two entries differ by 100%, the last to entries differ by 1%.

 

Exponential progression: 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024

In absolute terms: the first two entries differ by 1, the last two entries differ by 512.

In relative terms: the first two entries differ by 100%, the last to entries differ by 100%.

I can agree with what you say above. In fact, I'm not sure why we're actually in disagreement over this issue.

So I'll add the following (which is pretty close to what you've said above):

On a linear scale, there is a direct relationship between a number on the scale, and what that number actually represents:

Here is an example of a linear scale:

And this scale is also a linear:

On an exponential scale, there is an exponential relationship between a number on the scale, and what that number actually represents.

Here is an example of an exponential scale in powers of 2:

I would say that I can look at values on any scale, and tell if it is linear or exponential fairly simply.

I ask myself: is the relative difference between 1 & 2 the same as the relative difference between 3 & 4 ?

With an Exponential scale, the relative difference between 1 & 2 on that scale will always be the same as the relative difference between 3 & 4.

With a Linear Scale, the relative difference changes at different points on the scale. As you say above: Going from 1 to 2 represents a relative difference of 100%, but going from 3 to 4 only represents a relative difference of 33%

Putting this observation to use in the CV question. . . .

In Hero, the relative difference between 1 OCV vs 2 DCV is exactly the same as the relative difference between 3 OCV vs 4 DCV. All I have to do is ask which progression that fits.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

You made a number of important points, but I think the following represents the core of the disagreement.

The same explaination could apply to Hero' date=' maybe 10,000 DCV and 10,030 OCV are supposed to be 99.7% the same, IMO they just don't play out that way.[/quote']

Where in the rulebook does it say that they're supposed to be 99.7% the same? In combat against each other, their more like 99% different.

It does not say that they are supposed to be 99.7% the same in the rule book.

 

However, by saying that there is a linear relationship in terms of CVs, then it would follow that they are very close (99.7%) relative to one another.

 

The linear value of 10,000 is almost exactly the same as the linear value of 10,030. In linear terms, there is only a slight relative difference between these two values (30 units of difference, out of 10,000).

 

Here are some other examples of this relative difference in terms of other linear scales:

 

If you make $10,030 during the same period that I make $10,000, I'd say that our pay rates are almost exactly the same.

 

If you weigh in that 100.3 lbs and I weigh in at 100.0 lbs, I'd say that we have almost exactly the same weight.

 

If you paid $10,030 for your car, and I paid $10,000 for mine, I'd say that our cars cost almost the same amount.

 

If you are 72 inches tall, and I am 71.8 inches tall, I'd say that we are very close in height.

The thing is that I agree with you that, the combat values, as they play out against each other, are more than 99% different. That implies to me that we are not looking at a linear CV scale.

 

That makes me think of something like the Richter scale. A 10,000 rated earthquake would be totally different in power relative to a 10,030 rated quake. (not that you'd actually get such a quake in practice anymore than you'd be likely to get 10,000 OCV)

 

That also applies to lifting in HERO. A STR of 10,030 can lift 64 times as much as a 10,000 STR can lift. The actual relative lift values of these two STR stats are very different, and I wouldn't need anymore than that to tell me that they are not on a linear scale.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

Warp9: At first, I thought I understood the point you were trying to make, but it seems I have missed it. If it matters to you, you could try restating it.

 

Is your point that:

a) I have identified one or more of the scales within HERO incorrectly?

You think that one or more of the scales within HERO should be changed to some other scale?

c) There are scales within HERO that you think should be used in a different way?

d) Something else?

 

If it's A, which one(s)? I'd be happy to correct any misidentifications I may have made. I don't think I made any so far. And I'm at least correct about all the ones you've mentioned so far.

It is A.

Both the CV case and the Mental Powers Effect case are about contests between characters. I feel that relative difference is more important than actual linear difference between characters.

Why do you say "probably"? Don't you know how the stats work? They either work linearly or exponentially (or by some other scale). In this case, they happen to work linearly. There's no "probably" about it.

That is because I'm basing my views on how things should work if the rules are IMO "well made."

GURPS 3rd edition is a good example of how I could be wrong. Their rules for linear contests did not take into account relative difference between characters. I might have concluded, in error, that they did not want fully linear stats. But GURPS specifically addressed this problem in one of the Compedium Rule books: they fixed it so that contests were redone to take into account relative ability. Thus a contest between two pixies with stats of 1 & 2 played out the same way that a contest would between two humans with stats of 10 & 20. In short, GURPS 3rd ed wanted linear stats, but the original 3rd ed rules were poorly done. And before they updated the rules, it would not have seemed fully linear to me.

The same explaination could apply to Hero, maybe 10,000 DCV and 10,030 OCV are supposed to be 99.7% the same, IMO they just don't play out that way.

For any stat within the game, a difference between two characters can be expressed as either an absolute number (in points of stat, or character points spent, or some other unit), or as a relative number (a percentage or a fraction). If Ahmed has a 20 in "gloofosity" and Nunzio has a 21 in "gloofosity", then you can say either, "Nunzio is 1 point more gloofous than Ahmed," or, "Nunzio is 5% more gloofous than Ahmed." Which of those two statements is more useful will depend on what it is you're trying to do. In HERO, most of the time, it's the absolute difference that matters, such as in Damage vs. Defence, STR-vs-STR rolls, Skill contests, OCV vs. DCV, etc. Apart from the one and a half examples I gave in my last post, I can't think of any instances in HERO where the relative difference matters.

The key point where we disagree is that I don't beleive that absolute difference has anything to do with contests between characters.

Going back to the ant, and the puppy, and the two warriors: the same absolute differences exist in each contest, but in one case, those numbers mean a great deal more.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

::sigh::

Warp9: you started by saying that CV could not be a linear scale because it didn't take into account relative differences (i.e., differences in ratio).

 

When it was pointed out that CV DID act in a linear fashion, you went into enormous detail about how a linear STR stat wouldn't act like HERO's exponential STR stat.

You mean "pointed out" in the following quote?

In linear terms the difference between 1 DCV and 6 OCV is much greater than the difference between 51 DCV and 56 OCV.

No. It's exactly the same. 6 OCV hits 1 DCV on 16 or less. 56 OCV hits 51 DCV on 16 or less. Q.E.D. And 1006 hits 1001 on 16 or less. etc. And you yourself admit that it's the same a few paragraphs later:

But you'll find that the combat difference between 1 DCV and 6 OCV is the same as the difference between 101 DCV and 106 OCV, this speaks of a non-linear relationship

No. That is precisely what a linear relationship is. A difference of 5 at one place in the scale has the same effect as a difference of 5 at another place in the scale. Compare this to a exponential scale: taking a RW example, the Richter scale, which measures the power of earthquakes:

I've already explained how PhilFleischmann was incorrect.

Phil was correct that, in terms of a linear scale, each point means exactly the same as every other point in linear value. The problem is that, in terms of a contest between characters, having some number of points of difference on a linear scale means nothing. In relative terms, the difference between 1 and 2 on such a scale represents a doubling. The relative difference between 1001 and 1002 is almost nothing; it represents a drop in the bucket.

I'm sorry, but your repeated use of circular argument, straw man, and red herring has worn thin.

It is always easy to make such accusations; the problem is that I don't think that you can back them up with the facts.

Unless you want to address your original point and give some reason for asserting that CV's are exponential, I will not bother replying to any more of your posts on this subject.

It is very simple.

Imagine a contest between characters with stats of 10,000 and 10,030

If those characters are almost equal, relative to each other (99.7% the same) then it is likely that we are looking at linear scale.

If one character is FAR superior relative to the other one, then it is likely that we are dealing with an exponential scale.

Looking at CVs, we can tell that, in a contest between characters, the 10,030 OCV is far superior to the 10,000 DCV. If you put one up against the other, they are not 99.7% the same.

Thus I conclude that CVs are based on an exponential scale, where 10,030 OCV is FAR superior, in relative terms, to 10,000 DCV.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

Warp9

 

Variation in performance from occasion to occasion is irrelevent to the scale used to measure potential performance.

True, but I'm not arguing that it is.

I am arguing that there is greater variation, in terms of actual kg lifted, in the case of human weightlifter, than the variation would be with something like an ant.

This is self-contradictory. Either the "gap" is important ("very small point gap" vs. "massive point gaps"), or it isn't ("I don't think...the actual point gap is...important").

Maybe you can understand it this way:

I can throw a 0.5 kg (1.1 lb) object many meters further than I can throw a 10.5 kg (23.1 lb) object.

However, the distance in meters that I can throw a 50kg (110 lb) object is not much different from the distance in meters that I can to throw a 60 kg (132 lb) object. I can't throw either of those weights more than a tiny distance.

Again it is not just the actual gap (10kg) that is important here, it is the gap relative to the total mass involved. The 10 kg gap is much more important when going from a 0.5 kg mass to a 10.5 kg mass, than it is when going from 50 kg to 60 kg.

Or since you like Physics, we could do it this way. . . .

Is it now clear how that we can say, without contradiction, that the actual gap (the difference of 10 kg) can be less important than the relative gap in mass?

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

You know' date=' having read this whole thread I'm not sure any longer what you're [b']trying[/b] to prove, but IMO all you've managed to prove is:

A) rules that assume an exponential scale don't work well with a linear scale,

you seem to think the way Hero models the real world is the only way to, and

C) you don't really get it that different kinds of scale imply nothing about the value of the information presented nor the best way to use that information.

 

BTW: if I set up two machines, each designed to pull on a rope with an adjustable amount of force, and hooked them both up to the same rope (with a marker in the middle of that rope), the time it would take the "stronger" machine to pull the marker X meters closer to it would (barring frictional forces and other minor complications) depend on the LINEAR difference between the forces involved, NOT the ratio between those forces. Simple physics, really.

I believe that most contests between characters should be based on the relative differences between individuals.

Obviously you disagree. The problem with your example above is that, from my observations, most living things have good days and bad days. Therefore most living things do not act in an absolutely constent manner. If they did there would not be any need for randomness, the higher stat value would always win.

I don't always run the same distance at exactly the same speed. Although I will admit that my "good days" are almost exact in terms of timing. But a bad day can really hurt my times.

I don't go for "Ultra-Heavy" lifts, so I don't really know how much my absolute max lifts would vary by, but I do know that my ability to do reps of a given weight is not always exactly the same. And I'm assuming that such a difference would also apply to the max weight I could lift in a given situation.

Further, it seems to me that these differences between good days and bad days are relative to the level of power we are discussing. For example: it seems likely that a human weight lifter might differ by a +/- 0.1 kg between max lift from a good day to a bad day (note: if people have specific data on these matters it would be interesting to hear about it) . An ant's lifting may not be exactly constent either, but it will never vary by +/- 0.1 kg.

This brings me back to my primary point: assuming that contests between characters are based on the relative differences between individuals, then this relative difference can be expressed as a constent gap in an exponential system.

A 5 point gap in Hero System could be the difference between a strong pixie and a weak pixie, or the difference between a strong human and a weak human, or the difference between a strong giant and a weak giant. That way, the rules will be more consistent in contests involving all sorts of creatures, including both strong and weak pixies, as well as strong and weak giants.

On the other hand, in a linear system, strong and weak pixies will have a very small point gap between them, where as strong and weak giants will have massive point gaps between them. So I don't think that, in terms of contests between entities (in linear systems), the actual point gap is that important.

The actual amount of power you are dealing with can be important in many cases. But in contests between characters, IMO that, rather than knowing that character A can lift X more kg than character B, it is more inportant that character A is 20% percent stronger than character B.

GURPS 3rd edition (where STR is linear) actually dealt with this exact problem in one of the GURPS compendiums. Their system for Strength contests was based upon actual point differences in STR values. But the GURPS designers realized that, while this system functioned fairly well for normal humans, it was broken for contests involving giants and contests involving pixies. The giants had too great a difference in STR, and the pixies had too small a difference in STR.

All of this leads me to conclude that the way some contests function in Hero system means that stats like OCV and DCV probably follow an exponential pattern, rather than linear pattern.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

Warp9,

I don't really understand most of this stuff, but I think the problem here is you're trying to think "real world" instead of looking at the mechanics, and Phil is looking at straight mechanics, and saying "how you use them is up to you".

 

In Mechanics terms Warrior 1 will ALWAYS win, the puppy will ALWAYS win (assuming you just compare STR and don't introduce random die rolls), and they will always win by exactly the same amount.

 

Even if you introduce die rolls, assuming everyone rolls the same number of dice based on STR (for example everyone rolls 1 die for every .01 STR) Warrior 1 and the puppy will win pretty much the same number of times. From a mechanics standpoint there is NO difference between the puppy and warrior 1.

From a mechanics standpoint, in HERO (using an exponential scale) there is a *BIG* difference in the two STR contests.

The example I used was based upon a linear system. In a linear system the strength stats were as follows:

Warrior#1 = STR 20

Warrior#2 = STR 19

Puppy = STR 1.01

Ant = STR 0.01

In HERO the stats would be a bit different. I'm going to convert the stats based on lift ability. In a linear game (assuming stat 10 is normal), double normal lift STR = 20, but in HERO double normal lift STR = 15. So warrior #1 goes from 20 linear STR to 15 HERO STR.

In HERO exponential stats would look as follows:

Warrior#1 = STR 15

Warrior#2 = STR 15

Puppy = STR -6

Ant = STR -40

In an exponential system, there is little difference between the two warriors, but there is a HUGE (34 point) STR difference between the Puppy and the Ant.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

That's not an apples-to-apples comparison. To make it fair, let's stipulate that both warriors weigh 100 kg, the dog weighs 10 kg, and the ant is a giant ant, also weighing 10 kg (even though it still only has 0.01 STR).

No. We'll stipulate that there is a 1 point difference in strength and a 2 kg difference in weight between each contestant.

Warrior 1 has a STR of 20 and a weight of 102 kg.

Warrior 2 has a STR of 19 and a weight of 100 kg.

The puppy has a STR of 1.01 and a weight of 2.01 kg

The ant has a STR of 0.01 and a weight of 0.01 kg.

In each case the stronger contestant has an edge of 1 point of STR, and an advantage of 2 kg in weight. Is it your position that the contest between the two warriors has the same odds as the contest between the puppy and the ant?

Again, it is my position that the actual linear difference is less important than the relative difference. 1 point of STR and 2 kg doesn't mean that much to the two warriors, but it represents a huge difference between the puppy and the ant.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

And the feeling is mutual.

 

 

Hmmm... The 100 kg stone takes 99 kg-weight of force more to lift than the 1 kg stone. The 1,000,100 kg stone takes 99 kg-weight of force more to lift than the 1,000,001 kg stone. That's a linear scale.

Yes, that is a linear scale.

But in almost all cases where you are dealing with 1,000,000 kg stones, a 99 kg difference is irrelevant. On the other hand, in almost all cases where you are dealing with grains of sand, 99 kg makes a world of difference.

The various scales (linear, exponential, etc.) are about specific numeric measurements. "Nothing" and "vast" are not numbers on any scale, except "comparative".

Exactly, and when we are talking about combat we are talking about a comparison between different characters.

In combat, how does a DEX 10,000 character compare against a DEX 10,030 character? I want a comparative answer. Are these two characters almost exactly the same (relative to each other) or are they vastly different?

If you actually want to measure force, mass, weight, etc., 99 kg isn't "nothing" it's something. And it's the same thing whether you add it on top of 1 kg, or on top of 1,000,001 kg. It's 99 kg.

 

I understand what you mean, though: you're talking about a *relative* difference. That may be useful in some contexts. It might even have some uses in HERO System (though I can't think of any off hand).

You can't think of any?

Are you really telling me that you believe that (assuming a linear strength system) in a tug-of-war contest it would be absolute difference in strengh rather than relative difference in strength?

Are you telling me that, in such a system, 1 point of STR is 1 point of STR, no matter where you are on the scale?

Imagine two warriors who are about to engage in such a contest: the first with STR 20, and the second with STR 19---that sounds like a pretty close tug-of-war match to me. . . .

Now, imagine a puppy (STR 1.01) in a tug-of-war with a common ant (STR 0.01), is there any question who should win in such a contest?

So again, are you really telling me that, in contests between two characters (in a linear system), a point of STR is a point of STR?

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

No. It's exactly the same. 6 OCV hits 1 DCV on 16 or less. 56 OCV hits 51 DCV on 16 or less. Q.E.D. And 1006 hits 1001 on 16 or less. etc. And you yourself admit that it's the same a few paragraphs later:

 

No. That is precisely what a linear relationship is. A difference of 5 at one place in the scale has the same effect as a difference of 5 at another place in the scale.

I bleive that you are confused about what the impact of a linear relationship in a game system is.

Let us start with a discussion about comparing 2 things.

Imagine that you are comparing a 1 kg stone and a 100 kg stone. Assuming the same density of material, it should be pretty easy to tell the two stones apart. Now imagine comparing a 1,000,001 kg stone with a 1,000,100 kg stone.

There is still the same difference between the two stones (99 kg difference). The problem is that 99 kg of difference is nothing when you are looking at 1 million kg size stones. And even 1 kg difference is vast when comparing different grains of sand.

And that is the point. In terms of contests, it is not just what the difference in linear values is, but it where on the linear scale that the value appears.

What you are saying above is that, in a linear strength system, a contest between pixie with a 1 STR, and a child with a 5 STR, should have the exact same odds as a contest between two giants with 10,001 STR and 10,005 STR respecitvely.

I would disagree strongly.

There is a massive difference in relative strength between the child and the pixie, whereas the giants are so close in strength that they would probably have no way to figure out the difference.

What is a difference of 4 points of STR to a giant with a STR of more than 10,000 ?

But between two pixies, a difference of few linear points of STR is vast.

Re: Master List of Scales in HERO

I have a problem with your list of scales. . . .

You say that Combat Skill Levels have a linear Effect on Attack Rolls.

But is it really a linear effect?

In linear terms the difference between 1 DCV and 6 OCV is much greater than the difference between 51 DCV and 56 OCV.

However, in exponential terms, it is more important that there is 5 points of difference involved.

If combat values were linear, a 6 OCV is 500% greater than a 1 DCV, but a 106 OCV is only 5% greater than 101 DCV. The 101 VS 106 should be almost the same, but the 1 VS 6 should make a huge difference in combat.

But you'll find that the combat difference between 1 DCV and 6 OCV is the same as the difference between 101 DCV and 106 OCV, this speaks of a non-linear relationship.

Another example of this issue is where you mention: "EGO's Effect vs. Mental Attacks"

If this scale were truely linear then a 3 EGO would be much different than a 13 EGO, whereas a 143 EGO would be much closer to a 153 EGO. However, a gap of 10 points is a gap of 10 points. According to the current rules, the same roll that would give me total control over a 210 EGO, might have no impact at all on a 250 EGO, yet in linear terms these EGOs are very close.

However, if EGO is resisitance vs Mental Attacks in exponential then a 250 EGO is much greater than a 210 EGO.

For a look at what a linear effect of EGO vs Mental Attacks would look like, take a look at the old rules (pre-4th edition).

The old way Resistance worked was:

1 X EGO Minor Effect

2 X EGO Moderate Effect

3 X EGO Major Effect

4 X EGO Extreme Effect

In the old days there was a much bigger difference between a 3 EGO and a 13 EGO than there was between a 53 EGO and a 63 EGO.

If you rolled a 12 on the Mental Attack dice, you would have no impact at all on the 13 EGO, but you could get a 4 X Effect (Extreme Effect) on the 3 EGO with that same roll.

On the other hand the biggest difference you could ever get between the 53 and 63 EGO would be sometime like 2 X EGO vs 1 X EGO (and that is only a limited range of numbers between break points.

Re: Accumulating points

10x2d6 NND may be the same in damage delivered as a 20d6 NND, but it is not the same at all in practical application,

Still, there are ways to do it. Imagine a character with a 2d6 EB, autofire (X256 shots), area effect (10" radius), no range, 0 End, NND attack.

and as far as going damage to planets and mountains goes, one big hit is much much more effective than the same dice in smaller hits.

In the context of NNDs (ones that do BODY), I find this comment a bit strange. . . .

According to the progression in the book, body goes up by +1 for each doubling of mass. That means a really HUGE object might have 50 BODY. If you are talking about an NND attack, it means that you have to do 100 BODY to completely destroy that object.

That can be 100 BODY from 30 X 1d6 NNDs or from 1 X 30d6 NND, I do not see where the rules state that it makes a difference.

The only place where it seems like there might be a difference is when it comes to knock-back.

For hits that defences apply against the discrepency becomes even more marked.

I'll agree with that point.

It is in the application of defences that one becomes aware that a single 15d6EB can be infinitely more effective than any number of 5d6 EBs.

Re: Accumulating points

Cumulative is a +1/2 advantage and doubling the number of points you can accumulate in total is a +1/4 advantage.

 

As a back up slot in a mental MP that is just too good to be true for the points, IMO.

 

EG:

 

Mental MP 60 points

 

6 12d6 telepathy (60 points active)

6 12d6 mind control (60 points active)

2 2d6 telepathy, cumulative (x8), piercing (22 points active)

 

Now in combat you can do a decent mind read, but once you have your opponent subdued, only those with hardened mental defence (rare in my games) will have a chance. And for 2 points, why not: you can deep read an opponent and he’ll never know you’ve been in – you can manage 96 points of effect with that set up.

 

Also monstrously synergistic with, for example, invisibility.

 

So: CONTENTION – CUMULATIVE IS TOO CHEAP, or at least the cost of increasing the maximum pool size is.

 

Proposed solutions:

 

1. Increase the cost of the increased multiples. That works to an extent but as it is an exponential progression and, usually when you use cumulative the cost of the base power is low, this is not going to make a huge cost difference. For example in the above 3rd slot, if the cost of increased multiples was +1/2 not +1/4, the cost would go up to 30 active points.

2. Buy the extra points totals. Much like increasing totals for adjustment powers, you’d pay 1 point for +2 to the total. The problem here is that EITHER you have a slightly kludgy ‘extra points have all the advantages EXCEPT cumulative’ rule, or you pay a higher price because cumulative applies to those points too. E.G. 2d6 telepathy with + 60 to total would cost (10 + 30) x 1.5, or 60 active – the highest you could get into the MP – and the extra points account for 45 of those active points. Still, not bad – you can guarantee a level of EGO+30 on almost anyone with that, but you are paying a more realistic total.

 

So, is it a problem? What is the best solution if it is?

This is just one more example of the problems with "linear vs exponential."

Stepping back form the question of mental powers for a moment, I'd like to look at a related issue: damage. Damage in Hero is basicially a Cumulative factor. And it should be pretty clear to all of us that, especially with non standard defences, damage accumulation follows a purely linear trend. (ten hits with a 2d6 NND is about the same as one hit with a 20d6 NND)

The problem with the cumulative damage is that, if one follows the rules in the book for setting up body totals based on mass, a reletively low number of hits from a 1d6 RKA NND could destroy a mountain, or even the whole planet.

The same problem comes into play when we make mental powers cumulative.

If the system were fully exponential, 15 shots with a 2d6 Cumulative telepathy should not be the same as a 30d6 Telepathy. (it would be more like 256 million hits with a 2d6 = 1 hit with a 20d6)

And if the system were fully linear, then stats in the 1000s or higher would be common, and a 96 effect result for our telepathy would not be a big deal.

It is when you mix these two means of progression you run into problems. . . .

Re: Rolling Over versus Under

Thanks.

 

That is a start. I'd still rather there be a system of rolling 3d6 + skill versus a Target Number. I feel like I've read someone's rules on that, if only I could remember where...

In the past I've done something very similiar to what you are asking about. . . .

Combat:

As Lord Liaden has already indicated,

Roll for Combat is 3d6 + OCV VS a target number of 10+DCV

Skills:

Roll 3d6 +

No bonus (+0) for a Familiarity

1 + (Stat / 5) + Any Skill Bonus = Normal (Stat based) Skill

3 + Any Skill Bonus = Normal (Non-stat based) Skill

The target number for the roll would be as follows:

The standard Skill Target number = 13

TN 18 for a massive challenge

TN 23 for "impossible odds"

TN 10 (or maybe even lower than 10) for something easy

Re: Vertigo

IP = In Print?

Intellectual Property.

I don't pretend to know the ramifications of all the legalese mumbo-jumbo of who owned who when, and when who published a magazine/book/CD of what. Though I highly doubt that anything will be said if someone PM's me for specific power/skill data.

You're probably right.

After all, are the powers-that-be expecting someone to hunt down a 21-year-old magazine, or buy a whole archive for just one article?

You never know.

Re: Vertigo

I recall that Dragon article. I believe that material is likely IP of WoTC' date=' since they put out a CD of Dragon Magazine archives some years back.[/quote']

You are probably right about that.

 

That is one of the reasons why I haven't been more specific about the way any of those extra powers work. . . .

 

If people wanted to know more concerning those powers, I'd ask Steve Long about the matter before giving out any major details.

Re: Vertigo

The version of the original power (at least the write up that I saw) appeared in Dragon Magazine issue #100 on page 76.

While I'm thinking about it, here are a few more new powers from that same issue of the magazine:

Bouncing

Domination ("Magic Jar" Power---allows user to take over target's body)

Enragement (Force targets to roll their beserks)

Extra-Life ("get out of dying" 1 time for each extra life)

Slipperiness (good against entangles and grabs)

Temporal Fugue ("Do-Over" power---allows replay of immediate past events)

Re: Vertigo

Thanx for the help all, I like the suggestions. Does anyone remebers the original power as written? It must have been about 10+ years ago...

 

It followed a strict progression, like the chart for Mind Control or Illusions. It was a really nifty power when 1st printed... If anyone remembers it or has a copy of the progression, please give me a yell...

The version of the original power (at least the write up that I saw) appeared in Dragon Magazine issue #100 on page 76.

Re: Converting Players to HERO

Yeah, Ive brought many players over to the "dark side" who abandoned other game systems in part or whole in favor of the HERO System.

 

The only problem Ive found is that while many want to play, few want to GM in HERO.

It always seems strange to me when I hear this sort of thing.

I pretty much exclusively GM. And for some reason I often end up in groups where half the group members want to sit in the GM chair. We end up fighting over who will get to be the GM.