Impact of Figured Characteristics

[Vondy]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

I am trying to figure out the concept of a character with low DEX but high OCV

 

An fairly athletic guy who doesn't rise to olympic level feats of agility, but has achieved 10th Dan in a martial art? Say 14 Dex, 8 OCV, 5 DCV and a bunch of maneuvers to affect the base CVs and Damage?

[BeZurKur]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

An fairly athletic guy who doesn't rise to olympic level feats of agility' date=' but has achieved 10th Dan in a martial art? Say 14 Dex, 8 OCV, 5 DCV and a bunch of maneuvers to affect the base CVs and Damage?[/quote']

Why is he good with a pistol or rifle? FWIW, it is interesting that he still has a DCV of 5, what would have been the derived DCV for a 14 Dex.

[dmjalund]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Why is he good with a pistol or rifle? FWIW' date=' it is interesting that he still has a DCV of 5, what would have been the derived DCV for a 14 Dex.[/quote']5

[BeZurKur]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

5

Yeah, I meant that as a statement. That was poor sentence structure on my part.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Why is he good with a pistol or rifle?

 

EXACTLY!

 

I really liked the old system of figuring out Combat Value. I consider combat value derived from DEX to be a characters fighting potential. A combination of eye-hand coordination and combat agility. However to get better at combat, one needs to purchase Combat Skill Levels. Thus the example of the athletic guy with a Dex of 14 has a combat value of 5 (pretty decent but not overwhelming) but 5 Combat Skill Levels with Martial Arts. I understand that the newer system is somewhat more versatile, but I still prefer the DEX/CV connection.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

I consider DEX to be at least partially a function of Reflexes. Hence, it's primary function (in 6E at least) to be allowing one to act first.

 

I don't consider the ability to hit something to be ness. connected to reflexes. steady hand; hand-eye-coordination; luck (Bill Munney in The Unforgiven "Guess i'm just lucky, I always been lucky. . .");

 

detaching the two allows for a wider range of SFX to be placed on both.

 

I really don't see why that's a problem from a system-level Mechanics point of view. If you want a really fast character who can't hit the broadside of a barn or a relatively slow character whose a fighting ace that hits the mark every time (or just always manages to dodge in time)... DEX and CVs are separate.

 

Yeah, sure go ahead and make all the arguments you want for CSLs. At the end of the day the split allows for greater flexibility in the system. Which is the point. nothing is stopping you from buying High DEX + High CV.

[Vondy]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Why is he good with a pistol or rifle?

 

This has nothing to do with whether DEX should be coupled with CVs. Its a separate issue altogether: why are native combat values formed with less granularity than skill levels? After all, couldn't I be a natural shot due to eye-hand coordination, but not as good at martial arts because my gross motor control isn't as developed? I couldn't be a honed can-of-whoop-ass martial artists who doesn't know how to handle a gun? I agree its a flaw, but it has nothing to do with the point you were responding to: that there are plenty of concepts that benefit from having DEX and CVs be discreet.

 

Tangentially, I advocate to hit rolls being 11- adjusted by skill levels (attackers and defenders) and other modifiers. In other words: ditching combat values altogether. It would require a small amount of work to cover a few situations, but not overmuch. Most issues could be handled by applying modifiers to the hit roll instead of adjusting the DCV. And "native combat ability" that's always there could be modeled with persistent or some other apropos modifier. I am aware, however, that its too radical a change for most.

 

FWIW' date=' it is interesting that he still has a DCV of 5, what would have been the derived DCV for a 14 Dex.[/quote']

 

Circumstantial. It could have just as easily been 4 or 6. I wanted the modified value when dodging to be 10.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Why is he good with a pistol or rifle?

 

EXACTLY!

 

I really liked the old system of figuring out Combat Value. I consider combat value derived from DEX to be a characters fighting potential. A combination of eye-hand coordination and combat agility. However to get better at combat, one needs to purchase Combat Skill Levels. Thus the example of the athletic guy with a Dex of 14 has a combat value of 5 (pretty decent but not overwhelming) but 5 Combat Skill Levels with Martial Arts. I understand that the newer system is somewhat more versatile, but I still prefer the DEX/CV connection.

 

But, under the old system, the only efficient (cost-effective) way to be good at combat was to buy higher DEX, so you had higher OCV. Pretty much every published martial artist had high DEX, so he was also just as good with a rifle.

 

Under the new model, we can take the example martial artist proferred and decide we don't want him to be good with a blaster or rifle, so we give him, say, a 5 OCV and +3 OCV, only with martial arts. Now he's not good with a rifle, a blaster or a sword. He's good at martial arts, and not at attacking in other ways.

[JamesG]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

First off, I'd like to say I really like the way you think Hugh. Your thoughts in this thread make really, really, wish your ideas had more influence when 6th Ed was being developed.

 

But, under the old system, the only efficient (cost-effective) way to be good at combat was to buy higher DEX, so you had higher OCV. Pretty much every published martial artist had high DEX, so he was also just as good with a rifle.

 

Under the new model, we can take the example martial artist proferred and decide we don't want him to be good with a blaster or rifle, so we give him, say, a 5 OCV and +3 OCV, only with martial arts. Now he's not good with a rifle, a blaster or a sword. He's good at martial arts, and not at attacking in other ways.

 

The problem with the new model is it has just shifted the problem somewhat. Now it is raw OCV/DCV, instead of DEX, that is way more efficient than CSLs. I'm talking about the higher level CSLs here. As in the old system, low level CSLs (3 points or less) can be efficient. But look at the all combat CSL which costs 10 points now. So for 10 points you can have +1 OCV OR +1 DCV, switching between the two as needed on your phases. Alternatively you can spend that 10 points to have +1 OCV AND +1 DCV at the same time, all the time.

 

Granted, the CSL grants you other benefits that can be chosen instead of CV such as bouncing attacks, adding DC, adding to ECV, etc. But by the same token the raw OCV/DCV has the benefit of being on all the time; you don't need wait for your phase to allocate them. If you are surprised, or merely act on a lower DEX than your attacker on segment 12, your raw CV is active where your CSLs are not.

 

I'm not really sure why they changed the cost of CSLs. The old cost model for H2H or Ranged CSLs at 5 points seems like it's balanced with raw CV at 5 points a point. 8 points for "all combat" might still be a bit high (7 may be better). But they actually raised the CSL costs keeping CSLs as the weak sister when compared to the raw CV stats.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

You can remove my Figured Characteristics when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.

 

I'm there also. I just really loved the connection and interaction between them.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

An fairly athletic guy who doesn't rise to olympic level feats of agility' date=' but has achieved 10th Dan in a martial art? Say 14 Dex, 8 OCV, 5 DCV and a bunch of maneuvers to affect the base CVs and Damage?[/quote']

 

Sort of lets CSLs out in the cold doesn't it? I would find them sooo much more elegant in that situation

[Vondy]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Sort of lets CSLs out in the cold doesn't it? I would find them sooo much more elegant in that situation

 

It depends whether you want the option of assigning them or not. I generally do prefer skill levels I can allot, but some of my players have traditionally found that flabbergasting at run time. They freeze up and spend all day trying to decide where to put them. So, when I design characters, my baseline isn't generally how I'd do it for myself - its how I'd do it for them. Like I said, I would prefer we ditched CVs for a base to hit roll adjusted by modifiers (combat skill levels, maneuver or skill induced, or circumstantial).

[BeZurKur]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Yeah' date=' sure go ahead and make all the arguments you want for CSLs. At the end of the day the split allows for greater flexibility in the system. Which is the point. nothing is stopping you from buying High DEX + High CV.[/quote']

Greater flexibility is not the point for me, or at least not the highest priortiy: a balanced game is. Flexibility emerges from balance. Options that are rarely, if ever, taken because they are not cost efficient don't make the game more flexible. Those options may not as well exist. Also, I'm not convinced the game is more flexible now. CV could always have been raised through CSLs, so those examples of characters with disparate CVs and Dex could still have been built -- albeit, the CVs would have been adjusted through levels, but that shouldn't make a difference. I agree they probably wouldn't have been cost effective, and probably why we didn't see it much, but that's why flexibility emerges from balance.

 

It depends whether you want the option of assigning them or not. I generally do prefer skill levels I can allot' date=' but some of my players have traditionally found that flabbergasting at run time. They freeze up and spend all day trying to decide where to put them. So, when I design characters, my baseline isn't generally how I'd do it for myself - its how I'd do it for them. Like I said, I would prefer we ditched CVs for a base to hit roll adjusted by modifiers (combat skill levels, maneuver or skill induced, or circumstantial).[/quote']

Vondy, I think our takes are not so different. To be clear, I'm not arguing solely that CV should be a figured of Dex, but that Dex, along with ©SL and CVs together offer the most control allowing for small adjustments. However, under the current 6e rules, ©SLs are downplayed and their potential is not met. In this case, decoupling CV from Dex makes it too easy. Like JamesG pointed out, 6e didn't fix the problem: it just moved it from Dex to CV.

 

From a game design standpoint, I like your approach of flat 11- to hit modified by levels. It is more consistent with the philosophy of purchasing everything. Heck, for that matter, according to that philosophy, one must wonder why skills are still "figured" and simply not purchased to the level we want. We can practically argue all characteristics out of the equation and play an Aspect driven game like FATE. However, FATE is not Hero. I like the manipulation of values and their relationships that is part of Hero. There lies a game there I enjoy playing. It is one that does a good job of mirroring fiction while letting me move and adjust numbers. It also does so without compromising flexibility -- providing it continues to pursue balance. (BTW: I also like Aspect games.)

[Vondy]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

From a game design standpoint' date=' I like your approach of flat 11- to hit modified by levels. It is more consistent with the philosophy of purchasing everything. Heck, for that matter, according to that philosophy, one must wonder why skills are still "figured" and simply not purchased to the level we want. We can practically argue all characteristics out of the equation and play an Aspect driven game like FATE. However, FATE is not Hero. I like the manipulation of values and their [i']relationships[/i] that is part of Hero. There lies a game there I enjoy playing. It is one that does a good job of mirroring fiction while letting me move and adjust numbers. It also does so without compromising flexibility -- providing it continues to pursue balance. (BTW: I also like Aspect games.)

 

If it were up to me, I'd have skills be purchased at a flat 11- and have the current characteristic derived base values be toolkitting option. I'd probably use the option in many games, but I'd approach it from that standpoint.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

The problem with the new model is it has just shifted the problem somewhat. Now it is raw OCV/DCV' date=' instead of DEX, that is way more efficient than CSLs. I'm talking about the higher level CSLs here. As in the old system, low level CSLs (3 points or less) can be efficient. But look at the all combat CSL which costs 10 points now. So for 10 points you can have +1 OCV [b']OR[/b] +1 DCV, switching between the two as needed on your phases. Alternatively you can spend that 10 points to have +1 OCV AND +1 DCV at the same time, all the time.

 

Granted, the CSL grants you other benefits that can be chosen instead of CV such as bouncing attacks, adding DC, adding to ECV, etc. But by the same token the raw OCV/DCV has the benefit of being on all the time; you don't need wait for your phase to allocate them. If you are surprised, or merely act on a lower DEX than your attacker on segment 12, your raw CV is active where your CSLs are not.

 

It's debatable what levels should cost, in large part because the possible uses have variant costs. One school of thought suggests an All Combat level is a Multipower including +1 OCV, +1 DCV, +1 MOCV, +1 MDCV and +1/2 DC. 5 AP pool + 5 slots = 10 points.

 

I could have a 30 point MP with +6 OCV (6 point slot cost), +6 DCV (6 point slot cost), +6 MOCV (4 point slot cost), +6 MDCV (4 point slot cost) and +3 DC (call that a 6 point slot cost) for 57 points, still close to 10 points per, but I could have some OCV or DCV active while my MOCV or MDCV is maxed out, or increase those slots to +10 MOCV/MODCV.

 

Intuitively, I think 8 points for all combat, 5 points for all "one type" combat (HTH, ranged, mental) and 3 points for a smaller subset feels more appropriate, but that means 3 points for all Martial Arts, or for a Multipower, which seems like a break to the martial artist or multipower user who never uses any other attacks.

 

Maybe the answer is that a"smaller subset" is either 4 or 3 points, depending on how much versatility is sacrificed. Or maybe it's "more than 3 maneuvers/attacks requires the 5 point levels. Maybe 3 or less costs 3 points, 4 or 5 costs 4 points and any more costs 5 points. A Martial Artist who never uses non-martial maneuvers has no reason to buy HTH levels in any case, and often isn't very limited by the restriction to MA vs all HTH combat. The Multipower user likely has no other ranged attacks, so is similarly paying less for levels with no real reduction in versatility.

 

The increased cost of CV overall (+9 DEX previously cost 18 points with the other 9 to speed; +3 OCV and +3 DCV now costs 30 and you spend more if you also want DEX) brings the disparity between CV and levels down a bit, but the price increase pushes it back up. I could live with 8 points for all combat (10 point MP with +2 OCV, +2 DCV , +1 DC, +2 mOCV and +2 mDCV would cost 16, now that I think of it, using flexible slots). With 5 for all HTH or all ranged or all mental comat, and smaller costs for more restricted groups, we get a reasonable spread. (MP: +2 OCV, +2 DCV, +1 DC, only HTH -1/2 would cost about 10 points)

[BeZurKur]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Intuitively' date=' I think 8 points for all combat, 5 points for all "one type" combat (HTH, ranged, mental) and 3 points for a smaller subset feels more appropriate, Or maybe it's "more than 3 maneuvers/attacks requires the 5 point levels. Maybe 3 or less costs 3 points, 4 or 5 costs 4 points and any more costs 5 points.[/quote']

That sounds reasonable. I wouldn't have a problem with even 4 or more powers costing 4 points. Yeah, it is a break from the 5 point all HTH, but at a one point difference, it would take a whole lot of levels to grant a meaningful point break. A five point save on 5 MA levels doesn't amount to much, and I'm sure the circumstance will arise where the character will recognize his saving will cost him. A small break may be appropriate.

 

The increased cost of CV overall (+9 DEX previously cost 18 points with the other 9 to speed; +3 OCV and +3 DCV now costs 30 and you spend more if you also want DEX) brings the disparity between CV and levels down a bit, but the price increase pushes it back up. I could live with 8 points for all combat (10 point MP with +2 OCV, +2 DCV , +1 DC, +2 mOCV and +2 mDCV would cost 16, now that I think of it, using flexible slots). With 5 for all HTH or all ranged or all mental comat, and smaller costs for more restricted groups, we get a reasonable spread. (MP: +2 OCV, +2 DCV, +1 DC, only HTH -1/2 would cost about 10 points)

Hugh, you grok the math better than I do. How would your proposed CSL costs match up with the 6e point structure if Dex was tied to CV, but you had to purchase it to the appropriate level? What if Dex was 1 point?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Hugh' date=' you grok the math better than I do. How would your proposed CSL costs match up with the 6e point structure if Dex was tied to CV, but you had to purchase it to the appropriate level? What if Dex was 1 point?[/quote']

 

 

I'm not sure I get the concept - how would DEX be tied to CV (what gets purchased and what comes for free)?

[BeZurKur]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

I'm not sure I get the concept - how would DEX be tied to CV (what gets purchased and what comes for free)?

I mean the Dotted Line Link that Rapier first mentioned way back on page 1 (post #9) where he suggested buying the stats to the old figured values. Nothing is free. In the case of CV it means if you want a 15 Dex, then you must also buy OCV and DCV up to 5. The theory and ideal would be for the player to buy up the stats to the lowest common denominator where the "complete package" of CV, char rolls, and skill rolls delivers the most bang for the buck. Then buy up the other aspects up to concept. It is less economical, but you don't end up with stuff you don't need so in the end, you still pay less overall.

 

Let's take for example the gymnast whose agility grants some inherent bonus in combat, but not equal to a highly-trained fighter. The player buys him a 13 Dex and 4 CVs. He then picks up 3 SL with Agility skills (15-) and he is a world class gymnast -- all with just a 13 Dex. Other than in combat, he is indistinguishable from a Martial Artist with a 29 Dex.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Why shouldn't the Gymnast be able to buy their DEX to 29 and leave their CV at 4?

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Why shouldn't the Gymnast be able to buy their DEX to 29 and leave their CV at 4?

 

Agreed. 90% of combat is half mental, to slightly misquote. It takes a lot of training to make someone willing to pull the trigger on another human being. I have no problem at all with a character with 29 DEX and 4 OCV.

[Alibear]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Indeed Twinkletoes and his Ballet dancing chums will get chewed up by a platoon of her Majesty's Rifles no matter how graceful they move.

 

One problem with CV against skill levels for the 10th Dan dude is that CV doesn't discriminate (could limit it I suppose) v weapon type. He'd be all HTH and not so much range combat prowess.

[Vondy]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

 

One problem with CV against skill levels for the 10th Dan dude is that CV doesn't discriminate (could limit it I suppose) v weapon type. He'd be all HTH and not so much range combat prowess.

 

See my subsequent comments on why I went with CV instead of CSLs when providing what was a one sentence example.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

I mean the Dotted Line Link that Rapier first mentioned way back on page 1 (post #9) where he suggested buying the stats to the old figured values. Nothing is free. In the case of CV it means if you want a 15 Dex, then you must also buy OCV and DCV up to 5. The theory and ideal would be for the player to buy up the stats to the lowest common denominator where the "complete package" of CV, char rolls, and skill rolls delivers the most bang for the buck. Then buy up the other aspects up to concept. It is less economical, but you don't end up with stuff you don't need so in the end, you still pay less overall.

 

Let's take for example the gymnast whose agility grants some inherent bonus in combat, but not equal to a highly-trained fighter. The player buys him a 13 Dex and 4 CVs. He then picks up 3 SL with Agility skills (15-) and he is a world class gymnast -- all with just a 13 Dex. Other than in combat, he is indistinguishable from a Martial Artist with a 29 Dex.

 

This carries a cost of 6 + 5 + 5 + 18 (IIRC DEX levels cost 6 each) = 34. That MA would have to pay a further 32 + 30 + 30 - 18 = 74 points. Seems like the "only skills" character gets a pretty good discount of 40 points. Of course, much of this is because DEX is priced at 2 points. If we reprice it at 1 point, and drop DEX skill levels down to, say, 3 points, we get costs of:

 

3 + 5 + 5 + 9 = 22 for the gymnast and a further 16 + 30 + 30 - 9 = 67 points. The gymnast still gets a pretty good discount. My issue with the cost of DEX and DEX levels relates to comparison with the very persuasive PRE character, or the very skilled Scientist. I would expect any of these three characters, who are not skilled in combat, to be comparatively inexpensive given the substantial role combat plays in most games.

 

I find the costs of skill levels to be excessive compared to buying up the underlying characteristics, with combat skill levels a bit less overpriced, but still, I think, somewhat overpriced. Skill levels are easier to compare as combat skill levels carry more options, not all of which can be obtained by buying up a characteristic.

 

Why shouldn't the Gymnast be able to buy their DEX to 29 and leave their CV at 4?

 

I see no reason they should not be able to do so. Even under 5e, why couldn't the gymnast buy "+16 DEX, no CV, no figured, no combat order"? What would those limitations be worth? No Figured is -1/2, CV is at least half the value of DEX so it must be at least -1 and combat order, given it is believed to justify DEX costing double the price of PRE or INT, should be at least -1/2. So for 5 points, I can either buy +5 limited DEX, and get +1 to all my DEX rolls, or a Skill Level that grants +1 to any one DEX roll at a time. Seems to be it's pretty clear which one is more cost-effective.

 

In 6e, what should the limitation for "Dex, no combat order" be? Given the price of lightning reflexes, a -1 seems in order, but I can now buy +5 DEX, only for skill rolls, for 5 points or a DEX skill level that enhances only one roll for 6 points. If the limitation is -1/2, the skill level is 2/3 of a point cheaper (+15 DEX for 20 or +3 levels for 18). Make it -1/4 and the skill level costs 2 points less (at least some discount), but that implies the lightning reflexes are really worth about 2 points, and they are priced at 5.

 

I think LR is overpriced, but I also think the addition of +1 to one skill at a time is worth a lot less than +1 to every roll based on the characteristic. I think the system would benefit from breaking characteristics into their component parts, determining the value of each part and then using those values to price the characteristic, probably with a discount in the -1/4 range since the characteristic unifies all the component parts, so it's a Unified Power.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

The Question really is - what if I want all the benefits of DEX without the combat prowess? I want a quick, agile, world class gymnast (or better) without any combat prowess. Why jump through the hoops of Limitations. It's a waste of time.

 

The more you make any one aspect of the system do the more troublesome it becomes to model specific ideas.

 

Anyways, this is the last I have to say on the topic.

[BeZurKur]

Re: Impact of Figured Characteristics

 

Why shouldn't the Gymnast be able to buy their DEX to 29 and leave their CV at 4?

(Although GA is no longer following the thread, the open nature of a forum warrants a reply.)

 

The example of the gymnast was taken out of context: checking back will see it was to serve as a model for a points/cost question. IF there was a point to be made from it, I suppose, it could be that the elusive build 6e made possible was indeed always available through the use of levels.

 

I know that many like the decoupling of Dex to CV, but this thread is not so much about coupling Dex back to CV. It is about finding a balanced cost between the related char, skill leves, Lighting Reflexes, and CVs so that no option is left out or made meaningless. Coupling them back is a possibility I'm exploring, but I'm partial to them. However, my preference is irrelevant if we can find a way to make all the options (including CSL, SL, and LR) meaningful.

 

My issue with the cost of DEX and DEX levels relates to comparison with the very persuasive PRE character' date=' or the very skilled Scientist. I would expect any of these three characters, who are not skilled in combat, to be comparatively inexpensive given the substantial role combat plays in most games.[/quote']

Isn't that the case if we reduce Dex to 1 point? If we switch out the gymnast with the Dos XX guy, a Pre of 30 is 20 points. That's comparative to the 22 point version of the gymnast. The same goes for a 30 Int scientist. All three have their appropriate skills at 15-. If we give up the Pre Attacks or Perception Bonuses, we can buy it as levels (Interaction or Intellect) for 12 points. The gymnast could be 12 points too, but the example assumed his nimbleness gave him a slight inherent bonus in combat, hence the extra CV and 10 extra points. All this is only true if Dex is 1 point.