Istaran

Starting everything at 0 would (by default) substantially affect the costs of multiform, duplication, summon, follower, vehicle and base. It would add 186 to the cost of every character (which is fine for PCs/NPCs as you just add 186 to their starting points), which adds about 37 base active points to those powers/perks. You could maybe make this even more extreme by making people buy the standard human senses. (And maybe 5 points to have the default limbs. 0 point characters can be senseless spheres)

Well, unfortunately, they were. Here are the major features you have to address between 5th and 6th and what they mean. If your world is thematically driven, you have to figure out what to do about Power Defense and attacks that work vs. Power Defense. Drains became 1 1/2 times as powerful because they all became ranged. Now, any idiot can tell you that 60 does not equal 90. But between 5th and 6th, that's exactly what happened. What it means: This means that unless power defense becomes more common, characteristic drains are one and a half times as effective as they used to be, because these powers now gain range for free against progressively cheaper characteristics. The two big winners were END and REC. Whereas these characteristics used to be problematic to drain, now they're truly hideous, especially END. Most characters don't have more than 50 to 60 END, nor is there a reason for them to ever buy more. Whereas before, you were being drained of about 28 END for 60 points, now you're being drained of a whopping 52. Most characters will be burning stun after just a couple actions. However, Power Defense is difficult to justify and can't be put on every sheet so easily. Stun became half as expensive, while defenses stayed the same. Players began building characters that had lower defenses (around 20) and buckets of stun, because it was more cost-efficient to do so, and you stayed on your feet while your opponent dropped like a stone. The only way to correct this, as near as I can figure, is hard maximums for who can buy how much STUN. In a fantasy game this is less of a problem, but the math remains the same. What it means: It means that attacks vs. Power defense are going to become a lot more common, in order to circumvent the ridiculously high stun totals characters can generate. Growth: Growth in 6th edition works great, except for creatures whose only main ability is the ability to change size. This is a problem because the ability's most basic use should be the ability to change your size. In-between numbers generate absurd amounts of effort and calculation for very little end result. This is frustrating. Regarding Drains, is it really imbalanced though? Drain v STUN is 10 points to do 1d6 STUN only, OCV v DCV, resisted by power defense. Mental Attack is 10 points to do 1d6 STUN only, OMCV v DMCV, resisted by mental defense. Blast (AVAD: Power Defense or Mental Defense) is 10 points to do 1d6 STUN only, OCV v DCV, resisted by the chosen defense. The only real difference between the Blast and the Drain is how they are recovered. Blast will combine with other typical attacks for REC recovery per Turn (and subject to taking Recoveries), while Drain will be recovered 10 STUN/turn independently from REC. The drain still seems weaker, at least at this level. Draining END instead is a little more unclear. As you said, you can quickly get someone burning STUN for END. So at that point your 60 AP power has them taking 3d6 every time they use a 60 AP power. So after two of their phases they've taken the equivalent of one of those above 60 AP powers. Every Turn, they get back 25 END, which is enough to use 4 such powers, so you probably have to reapply regularly. It -could- get out ahead (though far less likely to stun them), but on the other hand there's a lot of ways to get around it. If they have a no-END attack, for example, possibly built on Charges. If Drain is more powerful, maybe it's simply that it used to be too weak? On the other hand, Suppress is now a -1/2 instead of half base cost. Otherwise, Suppressing STUN could be kind of out of hand.

Re: Multipower Variable Slots, ever use one? I tend to use fixed slots for the efficiency. For example, I had a draconic character with a multipower for his wings (flight, gliding, or +leaping) which cost 3 points more than any one of those. (Might have even had a second flight with lower inches and higher NCM, don't recall.), and an attacks multipower with a variety of different attack powers. Each of those MPs had nothing but ultra slots. I also had a kitsune themed character with a multipower for shapeshifting tricks: growth, shrinking, DI, stretching and a few others (PD/ED, I think?). Each of those slots were multis. She could mix and match and very fluidly change her capabilities to fit the situation from phase to phase. The dragon was a lot more efficient in combat, but mostly because of the massive point spend the kitsune had on the Shapeshift power.

Re: Is VPP overpowered/How do you properly use it? That's a good point. The ability to turn into a fly should always be built as a VPP, with the special effect that it lets you build things on the fly. Like: "I turn into a fly. And I build a rocket launcher (as an RKA with Explosion, naturally) on the fly."

Re: Is VPP overpowered/How do you properly use it? I think a flexible shapeshifter concept is a fine use for a VPP, and one that is a lot more well defined than a lot of VPP concepts (it's pretty clear what it can and cannot do). Though it seems to me like the concept basically demands a very costly Shapeshift power to cover the cosmetic aspects (and possibly some kind of Linked, like you have to change the cosmetic appearance and the VPP powers at the same time, so that they match. Want to have wing based flight now? You change to an appearance that includes wings). (I might allow a concept like Teen Titans' Beast Boy to skip this, based on the fact that he is glaringly obviously Beast Boy no matter what form he takes. But otherwise part of the advantage of turning into anything is that people see you as being that thing you turned into.) Multiform can be a -lot- cheaper because the possibility of completely altering your appearance is included for "free", and you can change a much larger chunk of your character sheet relatively cheaply, but the VPP + Shapeshift works much better for an "I can turn into anything" concept. (Personally I usually use Multipower for such flexible shapeshifters. It makes you pay for each new option, but makes it all clear and simple and you never worry about assembling a new power on the fly.)

Re: Let's talk about movement This suggestion is something of a poor simulation. By the end of the first phase when they are up to their full movement per phase, they are at their full combat velocity.That is, the SPD 4 guy is already going twice the velocity of the SPD 2 guy. It's only his average velocity over the last 12 seconds that will take him 12 seconds to build up to full, his instantaneous velocity is already there, and that's what's going to determine how hard he slams into things. It is however, possibly, a reasonable balance especially if we are going to keep the existing price scheme. Effectively you would be able to burn phases building up your momentum to get in one really solid hit. You would give up the attacks in between to add over-cap dice to your one big wallop.

Re: Is this worth a Limitation? I had a draconic character that used that for his "blind sense" (stealing the concept from D&D 3.5 dragons). In concept, his scales were sensative enough to feel the disturbances in the air including airflow, so in a vacuum or perfectly still air it wouldn't work (but he could always move his wings a little to stir up the air to suit). I agree with others that Restrainable isn't really fitting here. It's basically like trying to take points for "Can't see through opaque objects".

Re: Let's talk about movement

Re: Killing Damage in 6e I'm wondering if it would be more balanced for the normal multiplier to be applied pre-defenses? For your example, that pushes the headshot to 60 STUN v 48 for the KA. The body blow (x4/x1.5) is 39 v 32 for the KA. Typical (x3/x1) would be 18 vs 16 for the KA. Normal becomes all around better for dealing STUN, and the prefered choice for games with high resistant defenses. KA keeps its niche of being higher BODY per DC, and with only resistant counting so it is a good object/barrier/entangle/automaton breaker, but not the all-purpose go-to when hit locations are in play. This makes normal pick up roughly the same variability as KA does in a hit location world, and makes punching someone in the head a perfectly devastating attack (for a brick anyways).

Re: Killing Damage in 6e Hmm. Hit locations gives normal attacks the volatility to get the extra OOMPH to stun targets more easily, plus allows for tactics to play an additional role in damage per hit (by allowing you to use reduced DCV situations to target vulnerable locations and aim for the jackpot rather than just lucking into it). However, you probably need to limit or ban PSLs for targetting hit locations to make sure it can't become trivial (maybe 4 as a hard cap? Or limit their use to halving the penalty? Then few would take more than 2, and there would be no point to more than 4).

Re: Killing Damage in 6e I strongly agree with you. However, I also am aware that there is a vocal contingent of gamers who prefer their RPGs include occasional, random, semi-unavoidable PC death such that there is a noticeable PC turnover rate. I am not such a person, so I can only speculate as to their motives. I personally prefer to invest heavily in a single character, build them up over time and grow more depth and breadth to the character and I find it jarring to lose such a character unexpectedly and have to start over from scratch. If a game seems to make that a likely/common outcome then I personally have a hard time investing in characterization, and will instead make statblocks combined with hollow cliches as a way to protect myself from caring. One of the things I like about the HERO STUN/BODY version of HP is that it can make KOs plausible (even fairly likely) while keeping actual deaths very uncommon (while possible enough to keep it on people's radar). (I find 4e D&D achieves the same ends, but earlier D&D does not. Just one of those things that tends to split people between liking 4e or liking previous additions.)

Re: Killing Damage in 6e So if we go for heroic instead, it's say.. 6d6 Normal or 2d6 KA vs CON 10-12, 30 STUN, 12 PD/ED (6 resistant). Aside from a little extra volatility due to smaller numbers of dice being rolled, the numbers are basically all just halved and the chance of stunning remains unchanged. Also, if you look at your numbers.. switching to 6e no hit locations, only the low defense guy can even possibly be stunned by the KA on an average BODY roll. But with hit locations, our sample dude gets stunned by a normal attack headshot reliably as well as a KA. For that matter, the x4 locations are x1.5 for normal and will also stun him. (12d6 = 42, -24 PD = 18, x1.5 = 27 STUN through defenses, more than the 20-23 CON you specified.)

Re: Killing Damage in 6e

Re: Killing Damage to Normal Damage I'm generally inclined to think each PC should have one (or more but few) unique exemptions from caps that says they can be just a little better than everyone else at that one thing, and I think dealing damage is a reasonable one for wolverine. (Aside from regeneration and maybe freakishly high BODY I can't think of anywhere else he would be expected to excel compared to other supers. But dealing damage, especially to highly armored targets, is quite clearly where he is portrayed as shining.) Beyond that, even if I weren't inclined to grant such an exemption, I think ignoring one instance of AP from the cap is reasonable. In the vast majority of cases, he's just got the effect of one AP, which does increase his damage from what the dice alone indicate. The fact that he is extra-specially effective against enemies with one level of hardened (or rather, isn't screwed because they ignore his schtick and make him just plain lower dice than his teammates) is a niche bonus, for which he should pay cp but not be penalized with caps. It mostly only matters against enemies designed to let him shine. That is.. if everyone else has 12 DC attacks, I might allow for 4d6 KA + APx2 because that's his special area to shine and go over cap, while someone else might be allowed to break campaign CV limits or DEF limits or something. But I would definitely let him do an attack that would be 12 DC with APx1 but has APx2 (paying the CP and END, but not inhibited by caps).