CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

[Checkmate]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

Or he's more comfortable with people buying skill levels for boosting CV than DEX' date=' no figured...[/quote']

I think you're missing his point. If that's the way the GM wants it, not much you can do about it. However, you could spend 5 points on +1 DCV (5pt DCV skill level) or you could spend 6 points and get +1 OCV, +1 DCV, +1 to DEX based Rolls, and +1 initiative (3 points of DEX no Figured -1/2). You tell me what sounds like a better deal.

[Vulcan]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

I think you're missing his point. If that's the way the GM wants it' date=' not much you can do about it. However, you could spend 5 points on +1 DCV (5pt DCV skill level) or you could spend 6 points and get +1 OCV, +1 DCV, +1 to DEX based Rolls, and +1 initiative (3 points of DEX no Figured -1/2). You tell me what sounds like a better deal.[/quote']

 

There's no arguing which is the better deal. It just comes down to 'is the GM goin to allow it?' Which mine will not.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

There's no arguing which is the better deal. It just comes down to 'is the GM goin to allow it?' Which mine will not.

 

The question I prefer to address is "is the pricing correct". I believe most GM's would be more likely to allow this build if it were NOT so clearly a bargain.

 

Vulcan, let's assume your character has a DEX of 23 and a SPD of 5 (cost 17 points). You want to buy him extra +1 DCV. Would your GM object to you buying +3 DEX, raising the cost of DEX from 39 to 48 and reducing the cost of SPD from 17 to 14, rather than buying a DCV level (and let's assume you DON'T tell him your primary goal here is to increase your DCV)?

[Manic Typist]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

It should almost never be zero. I would think the least amount would usually be 3DCV' date=' which is the same as a 1 hex AoE. If you put DCV at zero, the attacker could not miss, no matter what, which is ridiculous. [/quote']

 

False, far beyond the later acknowledged 18 roll.

 

This assumes an OCV of at least 6 (11+6=17).

 

For OCV's of 0-5.... a DCV of a zero can still be missed without a critical failure.

 

This would be especially relevant for snipers trying to make that long, long shot.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

I have already been corrected, but duly noted, again, anyway.

[Vulcan]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

The question I prefer to address is "is the pricing correct". I believe most GM's would be more likely to allow this build if it were NOT so clearly a bargain.

 

Vulcan, let's assume your character has a DEX of 23 and a SPD of 5 (cost 17 points). You want to buy him extra +1 DCV. Would your GM object to you buying +3 DEX, raising the cost of DEX from 39 to 48 and reducing the cost of SPD from 17 to 14, rather than buying a DCV level (and let's assume you DON'T tell him your primary goal here is to increase your DCV)?

 

He likes to sit on PC power levels pretty tightly, 23 DEX / 5 SPD is pretty high in the current game (the dedicated martial artist is 26/6, but he's also has the second highest point total of 393 in a game that started at 250). Most of us are around 20/4.

 

Having said that, the GM isn't likely to allow either unless he feels it fits the character concept. Whether we feel it does or not.

 

Anyone running Champions in St. Louis?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

He likes to sit on PC power levels pretty tightly' date=' 23 DEX / 5 SPD is pretty high in the current game (the dedicated martial artist is 26/6, but he's also has the second highest point total of 393 in a game that started at 250). Most of us are around 20/4.[/quote']

 

Off topic, but...

 

That's fine as long as it's consistent. I would expect that 26/6 score to be infrequently equaled and rarely, if ever, surpassed by anyone else, including villains, assuming a typical Supers setting (ie not a setting where the PC's are comparatively low powered).

 

Having said that' date=' the GM isn't likely to allow [i']either [/i]unless he feels it fits the character concept. Whether we feel it does or not.

 

There's a point where the GM is writing a story rather than playing a game. To me, some compromise is necessary. If my concept is that my character is, say, among the strongest beings to walk the planet, and the GM tells me 50 STR is appropriate for that concept, that's managing the campaign. But only if I rarely encounter a 55 STR, and not often a 50 STR. If every other villain group has a 50 - 60 STR Brick, the GM has not played straight to my concept.

[Vulcan]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

That's fine as long as it's consistent. I would expect that 26/6 score to be infrequently equaled and rarely' date=' if ever, surpassed by anyone else, including villains, assuming a typical Supers setting (ie not a setting where the PC's are comparatively low powered).[/quote']

 

Three of the team went up aginst three members of Eurostar. Durak killed our brick, and the only reason anyone lived is because the GM sent NPC reinforcements in.

 

The latest scenario had us against Dr. Destroyer, Malachite, a rival villian team, and the US military in a three-way battle - us vs. Dr.D vs. Malachite and his flunkies. Dr. D took out Malachite for us. Miraculously only one character died - mine. But then I used myself as bait to get Dr. D to act so the rest of the team could short a massive power generator out through him... we actually managed to stun him! I pretty much expected my guy to die there, so I wasn't too upset about it.

 

Then we found out that Mechanon had been there too, stealing control of the computers... It really makes me wonder why our team even bothered showing up.

 

There's a point where the GM is writing a story rather than playing a game. To me, some compromise is necessary. If my concept is that my character is, say, among the strongest beings to walk the planet, and the GM tells me 50 STR is appropriate for that concept, that's managing the campaign. But only if I rarely encounter a 55 STR, and not often a 50 STR. If every other villain group has a 50 - 60 STR Brick, the GM has not played straight to my concept.

 

Well, 26/6 doesn't come up often, but back in the early part of the game one of the MA's first opponents was 26/6 when he was a 23/5...

 

And when the PC's were restricted to 60 AP a routine opponent had a 10d6 AEH Line attack...

 

It's that kinda game. And it kinda sucks.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

This is why I think most caps should really only apply to starting characters (within reason). The overall campaign caps should be automatically raised with the overall threat level used by the GM. Throwing characters hamstrung by hard caps against an unedited Eurostar or Dr. D seems out of genre for champions.

 

Is the GM still a big fan of hack'n'death games?

 

edited for clarity.

[Vulcan]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

Is the GM still a big fan of hack'n'death games?

 

You mean D&D? Not really, but he does like d20 Star Wars. But Champions seems to be his main game.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

Sounds like the GM is more interested in telling the stories of his NPC's than creating a milieu for the stories of the PC's. More an author than a GM, in other words.

[Checkmate]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

Well let's not jump to too many conclusions without having both sides. It sounds like the GM might just be inexperienced. Hugh Neilson and I have had a few discussions about the way I game, and I typically set levels around where your GM has them.

 

The difference is that if I use Eurostar, then I use the same limits as I've assigned the players. Your GM appears to be setting limits on the players, but using the established characters right out of the book. The NPC's in question may have been the result of him realizing his mistake.

[Vulcan]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

I might agree with you about inexperience... But he's been GMing Champions for our group on-and-off for something like 15 years now.

 

He was a pretty fun GM for most of that time. Even in the beginning of the current campaign things seemed pretty cool. It's just that as time goes on the PC's seem less and less relevent to the plot.

 

Part of it is that we are playing street-level superheroes in an Iron Age world - and we're expected to play Silver Age characters. It's just not working anymore, now that we're facing epic-level villians to boot!

 

 

Sorry, guys, I didn't mean to turn this thread into a pity-party. Back to the issue at hand...

 

(Incidentally, the characters I've played with the longest combat lifespan have been the ones with token defenses, high DEX and SPD, and 3-5 DCV levels! )

[Kdansky]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

This highlights the benefits of making DCV a figured characteristic which could be raised separately from DEX. I guess one could buy DEX, does not change combat order, OCV or skill rolls, no figured to get just DCV. I'd suggest that would cost less than 5 points for +3 DEX, since it should cost more than 4 points to get all the other benefits of DEX.

 

This highlights the problem that either DEX is radically underpriced or the broken-out components (I'm looking at YOU, Lightning Reflextes) are largely overpriced.

 

Is +1 DCV, non-persistent, really worth 5 points? A level in HTH allows me to choose between OCV, DCV and enhanced damage. A DCV level allows me no choices whatsoever - maybe it's not really WORTH 5 points.

 

This is so very true. I am accepting 3point levels for +1 OCV or +1 DCV by now, since that is how much it costs if you buy DEX. Having a *nonpersistent* +1 DCV for 5 points when I can have +1/+1 CV, +0.6 to dex rolls and +3 Initiative for 6 points sounds like a horrible deal.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

I think this might be partly a genre problem. 5 points for +1 DCV is great in a lot of heroic games using NCM.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

I think this might be partly a genre problem. 5 points for +1 DCV is great in a lot of heroic games using NCM.

 

I think this, and many other "skill vs characteristic" pricing issues are caused by the NCM rules. At present, skill levels tend to be overpriced, often significantly so, compared to skill levels. But skill levels are about right if we double the price of characteristics, so if we fix the price compared to base characteristic costs, skill levels become (too great) a bargain once NCM is applied.

 

I'm not suree about the DCV. Doubled, +3 DEX costs 18 points - 3 points for SPD = 15 points. You get 3 points' lightning reflexes, +1 persistent DCV, +1 OCV and +0.6 to DEX skills/rolls. That's probably in the game for cost/benefit. That's why DEX is perceived as such a bargain in Supers games. The character always needs SPD, and lightning reflexes doesn't hurt. Unless you have no need for a couple of the other components (eg. a big, tough Brick with no DEX skills), DEX is a steal of a deal.

 

My solution? Ditch NCM and fix the skill pricing. Use benchmarks to guide characteristics, not changes to the point costs. I dislike NCM in any case, since it imposes no costing issues on skills, skill levels or powers (including "characteristics as powers" so a characteristic with a +1/4 or +1/2advantage is much cheaper than buying it up over NCM unadvantaged).

[Vulcan]

Re: CSL's, while surprised and DCV question

 

I think this, and many other "skill vs characteristic" pricing issues are caused by the NCM rules. At present, skill levels tend to be overpriced, often significantly so, compared to skill levels. But skill levels are about right if we double the price of characteristics, so if we fix the price compared to base characteristic costs, skill levels become (too great) a bargain once NCM is applied.

 

I'm not suree about the DCV. Doubled, +3 DEX costs 18 points - 3 points for SPD = 15 points. You get 3 points' lightning reflexes, +1 persistent DCV, +1 OCV and +0.6 to DEX skills/rolls. That's probably in the game for cost/benefit. That's why DEX is perceived as such a bargain in Supers games. The character always needs SPD, and lightning reflexes doesn't hurt. Unless you have no need for a couple of the other components (eg. a big, tough Brick with no DEX skills), DEX is a steal of a deal.

 

My solution? Ditch NCM and fix the skill pricing. Use benchmarks to guide characteristics, not changes to the point costs. I dislike NCM in any case, since it imposes no costing issues on skills, skill levels or powers (including "characteristics as powers" so a characteristic with a +1/4 or +1/2advantage is much cheaper than buying it up over NCM unadvantaged).

 

This is the best argument I've ever heard for dropping NCM entirely out of the rules. Have you considered posting this on the 6E discussion?

 

At any rate, well said. Repped.

 

Edit: "You must spread Rep around before" yada yada... Someone else please get him for me!