Surrealone

Since you've expressed an interest, I will follow up. I suspect it'll be a while since we only game (in this particular game) once per month ... and everyone has fairly hefty schedules. i.e. I realistically suspect no decision to be made until mid-summer -- but who knows, the group could surprise me.

Oh if only a doc like that had existed for 6e (or if I'd found it sooner?) -- it would have saved me a lot of the expansion time/effort regarding the 2-page summary. That said, I've got a LOT more detail in what I created -- enough that it could probably be combined with a 5er set of rules to allow one to play a 'frankengame' that matches 6e. That wasn't the intent of creating it, and I will not use it that way (but I may use it as a quick reference, myself); it is, however, a danger if it's published ... which is why I won't go there.

Chris, Of course -- and doing so was the reason I was looking for a concise yet complete abridged list of 6e changes from 5e (including their details). My group will want to make fact-based decisions ... something that's tough to do from a 2-page change list that is devoid of specific facts regarding the changes. Since instantiation of this thread I have used the 2-page doc plus information from this thread to compile the needed concise yet complete abridged list of 6e changes from 5e. Using MS Word with 0.5" margins and mostly 10pt font, my doc is 14 pages ... and contains a list of changes (drawn mostly from the 2-page doc), the benefits of less obvious changes (mostly drawn from this thread), and the specifics of the changes (be it a mechanical change, a modifer's value change, new options being added to modifiers, etc.) as determined by comparing each item in 6e CC and 5er. It would be shorter, but I actually took the time to include a lot of tabular material (recreated in Word, no screenshots) so that the doc could also help us with the transition to 6e should the group elect to do it. Thus, I now have exactly what I need -- I simply had to compile it, myself -- and I will be presenting it to the group at our next session (probably over the mid-session meal). I'd make my doc available here, but I included so many specifics from 6e (in order to cover the details missing in the 2-page change list) that while my use of the material is fair under Copyright law, I suspect that distribution of the material here would be an infringement. I would like to thank the following people for providing very constructive input in this thread, as it provided non-rules insight into the uses/benefits of some changes ... while simultaneously guiding my eyes and effort in a constructive way (unlike some others, here -- you know who you are): ​Tasha BoloOfEarth ​Lucius ​bigdamnhero Since it was multiple posts by these folks that I found most helpful (no disrespect to anyone else; these were simply the most useful posts to me), I am quoting what I found useful, here, so that it's aggregated in one single post that can be marked solved -- while giving proper credit for the input I valued most:

Yea, but that was funny.

ChaosDrgn, Perhaps you should show them the receipts for your purchase(s) as proof that you have the legal right (under fair use provisions of Copyright Law)... As for secured PDF's -- it really ticks me off when I'm trying to cut/paste some text (for my own annotation use) from a secured PDF that I purchased ... and can't.

No surprise, there.

Steve's take on it basically amounts to (paraphrasing): '1 is the floor but the GM may make exceptions if there's a reasonable explanation'. Here's the full thread containing his response if anyone's interested: http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/92815-combat-value-sellback-to-0/ Surreal P.S. What's funny is I actually referenced PD/ED in my inquiry to Steve, as well. Great minds...

BACKGROUND: In 5th Edition and earlier, the sellback floor (for the sellback of base characteristics) was 1pt and only one figured characteristic could be sold back. This made logical sense as characters tend to have bodily issues when things such as STR, DEX, CON, BODY, END, REC, STUN, etc. are at 0. For context, back then OCV/DCV were not considered characteristics, so they couldn't be sold back -- and MOCV/MDCV did not exist. TODAY: Per 6e RAW, characteristics can be sold back to a floor value of 1, and an exception is made for Running/Leaping/Swimming to allow them to be sold back to 0m if the character lacks that movement ability entirely. Enter the new characteristics of OCV/DCV/MOCV/MDCV. Since no RAW callout is made to allow them to be sold to 0 if the character lacks that ability, this sets a sellback floor of 1 for each of them. ​QUESTION: Shouldn't CV's be able to be sold back to 0 if the character lacks combat capability that would result in an applicable base CV of 0? ​POSTERCHILD EXAMPLE:: Why, per RAW, when a non-mentalist sells back MOCV must he still keep a MOCV of 1 -- which he would have no way to develop and no way of using? If the character has no mental powers and, thus, no experience or means to use them -- shouldn't he be able to sell this back to 0 ... much like he sells back base swimming to 0 if he can't swim? NOTES: ​I realize that on the surface this gets a little comical with DCV and OCV, but CV's of 0 still translate to being able to fight -- just badly. That can be a boon for some, as in some cases a DCV of 0 may be desired -- say, by a character that LIKES getting hit because he uses Absorption as a defense to feed his abilities. Hence why I am asking if CV's can be sold to 0 like running/swimming/etc. when appropriate. ​Please advise. ​Surreal P.S. PD/ED come to mind, here, too. There may be situations where a character lacks one or both (lacking ED would probably be the most common). Shouldn't these be able to be sold to 0, too, if the character reasonably lacks one or both, due to concept -- much like running/swimming/etc being able to go to 0?

Sellback to 1 is RAW, so I think you're only arguing the difference between combat values of 0 and 1, here. I'm baffled why you seem to feel that a non-mentalist should have a minimum 1 MOCV when he has no mental powers and no offensive mental capability, whatsoever. If ever there was a non-munchkin case for selldown of a combat value to 0, that's the poster child for it. Food for thought: Consider that when sellback to a minimum of 1 was set as RAW, it was a time when secondary characteristics were figured from the primaries ... when only one figured could be sold back ... and when combat values were not characteristics, at all. IIRC, the sellback to 1 rule hasn't changed since before 6e. This is important because there are clear bodily issues that preclude a character from doing something (or harm a character, as with BODY) when things like STR, DEX, CON, BODY, etc. drop to 0 -- meaning the sellback floor made sense, especially in a world where combat values were not characteristics and, thus, couldn't be sold back. But here we are in 6e -- with combat values as characteristics that have starting values of 3 ... which can be sold back. That's new and different from ever before. And unlike STR/DEX/CON/BODY/REC, when combat values drop to 0, there's no harmful bodily side effect to account for -- there's just poor combat capability (which might be just fine for someone's build). Why let an arbitrary and dated sellback floor result in non-mentalists having a minimum MOCV of 1 (for example). You can function and even fight with 0 CV's, so perhaps the sellback floor needs some attention ... at least until starting CV's are 0 and cost per point is adjusted to keep yet more campaign point limit inflation from happening... ​I submit that the sellback minimum of 1 should not apply to combat values ... because they're just so different from all other characteristics. You can't lift your own weight with a STR of 0 ... but you still have a 62% chance to hit an adjacent hex with an OCV of 0 ... and a 26% chance to hit someone with a DCV of 3 using your 0 OCV. See why CV's and other characteristics are apples and oranges, yet -- and likely deserve different treatment? If not, I'll try to spell it out: Characters with combat values of 0 can still fight -- not well because the odds of successful rolls are low -- but they can absolutely continue to function. DCV 0? No problem -- hide Behind Cover. But if STR is at 0, well, that's a very different story. Since it's combat values we're talking about and you said you couldn't think of a reason to drop to 0 CV's, I figure I'll point out that 0 CV's already have well-defined consequences ... so you don't need to add anything as a GM ... and that there are legit reasons to drop to 0 CV's. Here are some mechanical examples: ​With DCV at 0 you're as easy to hit as someone who is prone ... or an adjacent hex (or even the hex in which the attacker stands). Someone with DCV this low is probably reduced to cowering/hiding ... unless s/he has defenses so strong that s/he just doesn't care about being hit (or better still, has lots of absorption as a defense feeding into expendable END... and LIKES to get hit). With MDCV at 0 you're effectively a non-moving searchlight in a cloudless night sky that is adjacent to someone about to shoot it out with a pistol -- i.e. super easy to spot (Mindscan), super easy to hit (mental powers), and offering no mental evasion whatsoever. i.e. Your mind is simply an open door to mental attacks ... aside from the mentalist's chance to fail due to the throw of the dice, of course. Someone who wants to be an open door for mentalists (and potentially has other protections) might very well choose this path. An medium is a good example -- an open mind, easily used as a conduit/connection via the mind. With OCV at 0, you have a ~62% chance to hit the hex you're standing in or an adjacent hex, which is a problem for most ... but may be just fine for an Image/Darkness based character that does everything with localized AoE and Personal Immunity. It may also be just fine for a mentalist that stays far from targets and snipes with binoculars and LoS mental powers. Consider someone with NO physical combat training and low DEX -- it's pretty reasonable for this person to have only a 26% change to hit another normal human with CV3. Somewhere in the world are people who just can't punch/hit things well. I believe we tend to use the term 'klutz' to describe people who fit such a bill. If someone wants to play a klutz, this is one path... With MOCV at 0 you have no inherent offensive combat value whatsoever -- logical for most entities that have no mental powers at all. Should you somehow temporarily gain a mental power that is AoE, you only have a ~62% chance of hitting the hex you're in or one that's adjacent ... and if it's not AoE, then you only have a 26% chance to hit an above average person's MDCV of 3. That's completely reasonable for someone who lacks mental powers and has no offensive mental capacity -- which tends to be most (if not all) non-mentalists.

I think a solid argument can be made for selling OCV, DCV, MOCV, and MDCV down to zero -- and that most GM's would accept it with reasonable justification (example: MOCV sold back to 0 for a character with absolutely no offensive mental capabilities). As for that justification: you can be DCV 0 in the game (concentration, prone, etc), right? So why can't you naturally be that way (distracted, focused on an activity, easily hit due to inherently poor body positioning) all the time? And why can't it be the offensive side that's at 0? And why not the mental aspects if it can be that way physically? And for the record: I tend to agree that OCV, DCV, MOCV, and MDCV should all start at 0 ... and have their costs adjusted to account for this (rather than cranking 6e starting character costs yet again in a revised edition). That said, until the rules are changed to support this, sellbacks make sense when appropriate for characters.

It is valid to sell MOCV and MDCV down to 0 with GM approval. That said, cptpatriot is spot on about whether you -should- buy it down. If you're strictly min-maxing for your own reasons there are a few angles that you might consider: It's 100% non-Munchkin to sell off all MOCV if your character lacks mental powers. You should absolutely do so if you're not a mentalist. MDCV is a different issue -- as all minds tend to evade attack subconsciously. That said, if you have a non-mentalist that is odd/different in some way (alien, mutant, etc.), a smart play for a non-Munchkin min-max is to sell off MOCV and sink those points directly into MDCV. This would result in someone with no mental powers doubling his mental defensive capability -- making him tougher to hit mentally since his MDCV would go from 3 to 6 -- at zero net cost. The fact that the mind is alien, mutant, etc. means it is sufficiently different from the norm ... offering easy justification for added MDCV. The benefit here is avoidance/evasnion of all mental attacks powers, particularly detection via Mind Scan and/or hits from Mental Blast. Another smart play for min-maxing a non-mentalist might be to buy MOCV and MDCV down to 0 and sink those points directly into 2pt skill levels with EGO roll if it is appropriate for the character to have a VERY strong will. This would be a net +6 to EGO rolls at zero cost. While this offers no help against Mental Blast, it's particularly useful in making Breakout Rolls against Mental Illusions, Mind Control, Mind Scan, and Telepathy. Sure, the character is easy to hit with mental powers, but once hit, he's darn tough to mess around with, mentally. I am actually in the midst of translating a character from 5th Edition to 6th edition. He is hyper intelligent (a 28 INT in a world where Einstein, Edison, and Tesla have 18's or 20's) and thus, is an easily spotted and hit beacon in the world of mentalists. He's also not a mentalist, himself and has a relatively low Ego (8 -- i.e. merely 'above average' in a human world) ... but is skilled at focusing his mind on things as required (e.g. to stay up despite fatigue, to tune out distractions, etc.) resulting in the character having three (3) 2pt skill levels with EGO rolls (labeled/named Indomitable Will). i.e. This IS a character who should be easily hit but darn tough to control with mental powers because of his own ability to focus his mind as needed (in this case, to make Breakout Rolls). I will likely crank his EGO roll even more (selling off all MOCV and MDCV) as part of the translation, since it's already appropriate and is effectively free.

I'll give you one guess as to what The Fornicator does with his...

I tend to agree, however, the desired effect is a tough one -- because the abilities should only be present/usable after healing is done ... and, in theory, should be stronger or more pervasive as the character does more healing. A multipower that draws off an endurance reserve -- which is ONLY charged when one performs healing -- may be another, cleaner route to go.

As an afterthought: Multi-form (where the forms stay similar looking but one of them has augmented abilities) linked to simplified healing could also work to achieve something similar to what I just described -- and it might be easier/cleaner.

Self-only aid linked to simplified healing makes sense for augmentation of things you can already do. Self-only transform of function (body ... as opposed to mind or spirit) linked to simplified healing may be appropriate if you gain abilities you don't normally have via empowerment. You'd likely need the Partial Transform advantage ... and work out with the GM (assuming you're not the GM) the (fixed) enhancements you could achieve and the order in which they'd become usable during partial transformation. As noted, the former presumes a fixed result approach; for broader (non-fixed) benefits you could also apply the Improved Results Group advantage. If you're not the GM and the GM has issues with this because it's overly complex or perceived as too powerful, you could apply a No Conscious Control limitation to the effects of the transformation and let the GM define how you're empowered when you heal others (instead of having to work it out in advance). Sane examples of new functions that make sense for a transform of this type include but are not limited to life support functions (extended/expanded breathing, diminished eating/sleeping, safe environments, drug/poison immunities, etc.), enhanced senses (IR/UV sight, HRRP, discriminatory smell, etc.), mental powers, telekinesis (mind over matter), new forms of movement (leaping? gliding? flight?), etc. The level of transform you require as well as the advantages/limitations will, of course, depend on what new functions you select. I'd think allowing you to hold your breath longer, allowing you to go without food/sleep longer ... would be a lower level transform than, say, giving you IR/UV sight or HRRP; the former enhances what you can already do with your body as-is ... while the latter lets you see/hear in wavelengths in which you can't normally perceive because your body lacks the necessary constituent parts to do so. I'd think mental powers, TK, gliding, etc would be yet a level of transform higher than, say, IR/UV sight, HRRP, etc.

I'd either lower the defensive bar for everyone or have everyone rebuild at the higher point total to compensate. After all, the automaton defensive powers are spendy for a reason -- so people not buying them should have the points to spend elsewhere ... either because the bar was lowered for everyone (freeing up points) or because additional points were provided to make up for the cost creep, resulting in those with automaton powers having nothing to spend ... and those without them having some points to throw aroud in other places.

You can't tell, you only ASSume ... and wrongly, at that. See, I already own 6e Champions Complete. However, if we're to move to 6e I need to convince the entire group to go through the time and expense of doing so. That's an upsell, so it shouldn't require already owning and then reading a new ruleset cover-to-cover to glean sufficient detail to make that upsell happen. (And the aforementioned two pages flat-out didn't cover it.) Put succintly -- I already fished ... and now need sufficiently detailed marketing material to convince other experience players to do so. That material just doesn't exist; and players shouldn't need to invent it to help sell more of someone else's product.

Per post #8, I had already read the 2-pager before I posted this thread. That doc doesn't cover the half of what's been detailed in this thread. It's effectively a moonside view of the earth's ground ... when I feel a 5mi (i.e. standard jetliner's downward looking) view of the earth's ground is called for -- and lacking.

Unfortunately CC removed things from places people were accustomed to looking for them. As an example, the default character sheet in the back of the book always used to have the cost of characteristics on it (a great place for a summary), yet despite there being space on the 6e character sheet or that data, it's not there. People have gone to that sheet as a lookup for years. I actually passed my copy of CC around at a previous game, which has 4 players (other than me) -- three of which have been playing Champions since 1st ed. Simply skimming and using the index, not a single one could find the information I just mentioned in less than 5 minutes. In fact, all gave up looking even though I insisted it was there. My point: Even experienced people have problems with CC ... due to placement of things. Experienced players who want to dive into it shouldn't need to read it cover to cover to get going ... yet basic changes are hard to quickly find. That's rather the purpose of this thread -- to come up with a single, condensed list of deltas that are supposedly improvements ... so that a group can contemplate them as it pertains to the time and cost expense of moving to 6e. ​Consider: At 7 pages of posts (and climbing) in length -- a concise yet comprehensive list of deltas is still not to be found in this thread. Reading this thread to pick out changes ... is really no better than having to read CC cover-to-cover to divine changes. A cut-down supplement (or free downloadable PDF?)... similar to the lacking section (as noted, above) detailing lists of things added/changed/removed by 6e, seems horribly absent.

I'm not sure 'approved' is 100% accurate, but thanks for causing me to search for and find this thread: http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/92702-detect/?hl=treachery

Especially in modern or futuristic campaigns -- where phone booths are hard (if not impossible) to come by. Even the Christopher Reeves Superman movies made a bit/gag out of this issue. ​

Powerful Heroic campaign, actually, but I bought CC because I didn't need all the fluff examples like 5er has. I also own most of the 5e published material. THANK YOU. You have no idea how much looking (as in flipping around in the usual places) in the CC book I did looking for base values. That's part of why I was pretty disgusted by it -- because when you hunt for a half hour on something that should be up front and easy to find, it's disconcerting ... especially when the past locations (like the character sheet) omitted the very info you're looking for. Incorrect read: I -want- to move to 6e, but I'm not going to read CC cover-to-cover unless the time to do so can be justified. Learning 6e is absolutely NOT worth doing if the gaming group won't adopt it. And the group will need to be sold on it. Hence this thread: I need the list of selling points to provide to the group. ​Honestly, it's rather comical to me that a complete list of benefits is not spelled out somewhere in stickied fashion as a marketing/upselling tool for the new edition. The 2-page conversion doc talks about differences but doesn't provide the rationale for the changes ... and the rationale is the important part to our group.

That is something I hadn't noticed considering I already know what the characteristics are -- and have not yet committed to reading the book cover-to-cover (because I won't bother spending time in that way if there's not enough justification, hence this thread). There was not a concise breakdown/listing (a la character sheet style) anywhere in the book that I could find after consulting the character sheet in the back of the book, the index, and the table of contents. For comparison, the character sheet in the back of the 5er book -does- have the base values. Why they didn't include the base values on the character sheet in the back of the CC book (and probably the 6e book, too, I'm guessing) ... is beyond me. This is a quick place to find all base values in one listing without having to read pages of info -- and has historically been there in each editions' stock character sheets... From my perspective there's irony in something called 'Champions Complete' ... being incomplete (compared to previous versions). I think I've got firm ground to stand on when I compare the concise listing in the 5er book in the form of a character sheet with all base values shown on it .... to the lack of base values on the 6e sheet in the CC book. One shouldn't have to read multiple pages and all characteristic descriptions/definitions to find these...

I have a 5e character with 2pts of LACK OF WEAKNESS for force fields/walls as a racial ability. He is a genetically-altered human with a mutation that allows him to manipulate forces/energy with the mind. The basis for this LACK OF WEAKNESS is that the character crafts force fields/walls with the mind (rather than undergoing error-prone physical construction techniques, such as using technology to create fields) and, as a result, they are less prone to error-induced weak points. ​Hardened force fields/walls are things this guy already creates, with the LACK OF WEAKNESS being applicable in addition to the hardening. Thus, suggesting hardened barriers and/or hardened resistant pd/ed won't cut it for a 6e implementation, as that's already going to be translated. With that in mind, how would I simulate the above in 6e?? (Keep in mind that we're talking a 2pt racial trait, here -- meaning double hardening makes no sense, especially as a racial trait.)

Thanks, that helped. It's a subtle but VERY important distinction that in 5er and earlier, the active points in powers could not exceed the pool cost ... whereas in 6e it is the control cost that sets the active limit.