Jump to content

Gnome BODY (important!)

HERO Member
  • Content Count

    278
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Gnome BODY (important!) last won the day on April 25

Gnome BODY (important!) had the most liked content!

About Gnome BODY (important!)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. COM 10 doesn't change from 5 real. On the high end: COM 20 drops to 6 real from 7 real, COM 30 to 8 real from 10 real, every 10 COM thereafter +2 real instead of +3 real. On the low end: COM 5 drops to 4 real from 5 real, COM 0 drops from 4 real to 3 real.
  2. Actually, let's analyze the book-value of COM. FRED says "COM Rolls are sometimes used as Complementary Rolls to some Interaction Skills in situations where a character’s appearance (good or bad) might influence what happens." We can model that via a series of Interaction Skill Levels (hereafter ISL) with the Conditional Power "Only where a character's appearance might influence what happens" Limitation and the Activation Roll Limitation*. Let's call the former a -1/2 by assuming that prettiness doesn't matter over the phone but does work against both genders. There's no rules in FRED for 7- or worse Activation Rolls, so we'll apply the "lesser effect" clause and cost them as 8-**. An ISL is 5 AP. COM 10 provides +1 on a 11-, +2 on a 8-, +3 on a 6-, +4 on a 4-. This sums to 5 real, which is exactly what you get for selling it back. So far so good. Except, of course, that the sellback doesn't remove your ability to make the Complementary Roll. COM 20 provides +1 on a 13-, +2 on a 10-, +3 on a 8-, +4 on a 6-, +5 on a 4-. This sums to 7 real (2 more than baseline), indicating we're breaking away from the COM formula. COM 30 provides +1 on a 15-, +2 on a 12-, +3 on a 10-, +4 on a 8-, +5 on a 6-, +6 on a 4-. This sums to 10 real (5 more than baseline) and indicates the COM formula doesn't hold. COM 40 is where the +1 is (functionally) guaranteed on a 17-. It's also interesting since from that point on, every 10 COM (5 real) just provides an ISL with (functionally) no Activation Roll (3.33 real). COM 5 provides +1 on a 10-, +2 on a 7-, +3 on a 5-, +4 on a 3-. This also sums to 5 real, or no cost difference compared no sellback. A clear issue. COM 0 provides +1 on a 9-, +2 on a 6-, +3 on a 4-. This sums to 4 real and indicates that COM sellbacks are vastly more lucrative than they should be under this formula. Conclusion: COM is overpriced based on the price of limited ISLs. It is, however, decently effective at enhancing interaction skills. Side comment: COM can enhance a Familiarity. An ISL cannot. I do not factor in an Advantage to account for this. This is an excellent avenue for further analysis. *: Technically the math works out differently between a single activation roll with different thresholds and multiple activation rolls with the same thresholds. But it's close enough for our purposes. **: Another option would be to extend the 6e formula.
  3. Now that I'm no longer half asleep and being inarticulate. There's really just three views and they're just different expressions of "you get what you pay for". View A says "Yes, he gets nothing from his OMCV so he shouldn't have to pay for it." View B says "No, he loses nothing from not having his OMCV so he shouldn't get points for losing it." View C says "Yes, but since he loses nothing from not having his OMCV I'll have to introduce circumstances where not having it inconveniences him." None of these are wrong. There's no one right answer. There's just different expressions of the same correct concept. They just need to be applied consistently across other sellbacks. That's that I was getting at when I mentioned the OCV sellback on a pure mentalist or AOEist. The only problems are when a player moves from a GM with a different philosophy or if a player assumes one view and the GM follows another. But these are all issues easily solved by sitting down and talking during character creation.
  4. You only really need two. Permanently being at half DCV and always having to make a 9- roll to do anything involving moving your body. Having 0 STR screws you over hard, unless you're a bathroom mentalist or other absurd TO construct. Tangent, but what about Presence Attacks require a mental attack roll?
  5. You can do this with SA just as well, though. If Amaza has SA "Beautiful" +2/2d6 and Miss Earth has SA "Beautiful" +3/3d6, Miss Earth is prettier. If Freako has SA "Fugly" +1/1d6, he's uglier than anyone without equivalent or greater SA with similar SFX. All you lose are mechanically meaningless intermediate breakpoints, and those shouldn't be a thing anyways. "You get what you pay for unless you don't pay in certain increments" is a garbage philosophy.
  6. On second thought, no, there's clearly no point engaging you on this. You're fixed in your opinion and will nitpick anything I say.
  7. The thing that makes this tricky is that some characters should legitimately be immune to all poisons, full stop. Beepers the robot has no business being poisoned by anything, and should have some power to ensure that. But under the rules as is, that's not doable without Absolute Effect fiat. And it's bloody expensive!
  8. The issue I have with the object tables is that at the 60AP level, the "superhero level" for my group, they produce results that are utterly incongruous with what we'd expect narratively. The Brick, with his 60 STR has 30 casual STR, averaging 6 BODY. We expect this super-humanly strong individual to be able to blindly charge through a chain-link fence, a normal wooden door, or a metal trashcan without slowing down. But all these things are statted out such that The Brick has less than a 50% chance of breaking them with casual STR. Similar issues arise with other expressions of STR, but the root issue is that the tables just make the world too durable for the narrative expectations that the word 'superheros' sets. I'm not sure if I should blame Heroic standards, where these BODY/DEF combinations seem reasonable, or the number-inflation shown in premade villains and heroes. But either way, the example tables simply don't work as printed for my group. So we're back at the "handwave it" stage of materials.
  9. Just to approach this laterally: If a character had nothing but mental attacks, would you object to them selling back their OCV? What about a character who only had Close AOE attacks, and thus would never need to make an attack roll, selling back both OCV and OMCV?
  10. Again, I hope your houserules are working well for your group. I'm well aware that HERO is a toolkit, made to be remade. But when a thread is dedicated from the first post to an analysis of an intricacy of the Rules As Written in a situation where there appears to be significant amounts of confusion and/or miscommunication, knowingly bringing houserules in is just muddying the waters.
  11. Your attitude makes it very clear you don't care what the RAW is, so I'll just say I hope your houserules are working well for your group.
  12. If we're being realistic? A normal human can break diamonds with a normal hammer. Diamond is a fantastic conductor of thermal energy. Diamond won't make good armor against most things. If we're wearing spandex? Diamond is just a SFX, put in whatever values you see fit. Focus on making the mechanics work.
  13. You are explicitly permitted to take Zero Phase Actions before a Full Phase Action. You are explicitly able to take No time Actions after your phase ends. Everything on your list can be done before or after a Full Phase Action. I ask you again, why would any of those things need to be done during the Full Phase Action and not before or after? You seem to be staunchly ignoring that point. Please address it.
  14. "The character’s SPD indicates which Segments he can take an Action in; these Segments are his Phases. " Bolding again mine. If your character has exhausted their segment 3 phase and takes the desired Full Phase action as soon as possible, it will be taken, both beginning and ending, on his DEX on segment 6.
  15. The rules for what Full Phase means are very clear. Now that you mention it, I strongly suspect a good deal of the confusion in this thread is some people knowing the rules-meaning and some people guessing at the rules-meaning from the words-meaning. "Full Phase (-½) means the power requires a character’s Full Phase to activate and use. The character can perform Zero Phase Actions before he begins activating the power, but may not perform Half Phase Actions. However, the power still activates on his DEX in the Phase; he isn’t required to wait until the end of the Phase to turn it on. " All boldings mine.
×
×
  • Create New...