My Energy Rules

[Gryphynx]

NOTE: This is mostly being posted so I have a thread I can just point to in future character creation on these boards... (though you are free to post any comment for discussion, or to credit yourself with whomever came up with the rules I stole... )

You may choose to use only 1 of 2 sets of rules. They do not stack...

Ruleset 1

DURABILITY is now split into 3 groups, each of the group having the basic cost of x1.

Energy Pool: Each level grants 3 Energy.
Energy Regen: Each level grants 1 to your Regeneration
Health: Each level grants 1 health.

Durability is calculated by adding the levels of Energy Pool, Energy Regen, and Health, and dividing by 3 (round down).

You may still use the basic Durability and Intelligence rules if you prefer in my games. This is intended to make things easier, not more difficult for you. If you do so, you may use the following rules instead.

Actions

Efficiency: (+1 to Action) Efficiency allows you to add 1 stone from the General Pool for every 2 stones you add from your own Energy Pool. The combined total may not exceed your AN plus any Ability Bonus you may have in that Action.

Talented: (+2 to Action) Talented works as Efficiency and does not stack with Efficiency. Instead of every 2 stones, it matches 1 stone from the General Pool for every stone you place from your own Energy Pool. Again, the combined total may not exceed your AN plus any Ability Bonus you may have in that action.

Innate: (+3 to Action). I do not allow Action-to-Modifier for Actions in my game. Actions have to remain Actions, and thus must always have at least 1 red stone in them to work (limiting the number of Actions you can do in a turn). Adding this Advantage to an Action allows you to spend 1 red stone, and be granted a number of stones equal to your AN, minus the 1 red stone you had to use (but not any Ability Bonuses). This may only be applied to 'Super' powers (not for Actions like Acrobatics or General Knowledge) that are not directly Combat Oriented, such as Teleportation, Create Illusions, Masteries that do not have a Force Blast, etc. Innate does not stack with Efficiency, nor Talented.

Modifiers

Multitasking: 4W
Add 2 stones of Energy to any one Action per panel. These come from the General Pool. Multitasking can not be used for Magic Actions, and may not be used with an Action that has Efficiency, Talented, nor Innate.

Multitasking, Advanced: 6W
Add 2 stones of Energy to both Actions you take, per panel. These come from the General Pool. Multitasking can not be used for Magic Actions, and may not be used with an Action that has Efficiency, Talented, nor Innate.

[Brainstem]

I like the concepts, but they seem a bit underpriced all around (with the exception of Efficient).

To compare with Talented, look at Force Field (which is already considered to be a bit underpriced, anyway). FF is, for all intents and purposes, a Force Blast with the Talented Advantage under the caveat that the extra stones only go towards Defense, and costs AN+3. A 1:1 trade-off of General Pool and Reserve Energy is exceedingly valuable and, to just guess off the top of my head, should be at least +3 or +4 CL. The same logic applies to Innate which, although not applicable to combat Actions, still gives the player an inordinate amount of free stones.

The Modifiers, particularly, stand out to me. For 4w, you can get +2 to any Action and for 6w, you can get that for both Actions. Targeting: 2 is going to cost 4w and Claws: 2 will cost 3w (presuming that, with the nature of this Modifier, it should be compared with retractable Claws) and these two are limited to only specific types of Actions and are still powerful enough to break the game. Even getting into Modifiers like Psycho-Centric Power Template, a MN of 2 will cost 6w for the player and, while broad, these still have boundaries.

The Energy problem doesn't get fixed by finding ways to throw more free stones out there; the Energy problem gets fixed when you find ways to limit the availability of free stones. The game is built and balanced around the idea of resource allocation, intending that limited access to energy is going to create an inherent balance within the system. It fell apart when access to the General Pool became too easy, making combat incredibly static and with pre-determined winners.

[WildKnight]

I didn't get past Talented. WAY too powerful

[Gryphynx]

The Modifiers are priced by taking Leadership at level 2 (or 4) and +3 for the Action to Modifier (Ie: You could have an item [AI Tactical Computer] via-canon for the same cost that does the same thing for 3w, I charge 4w). You admittedly couldn't canonically do the 6w modifier, but it seemed fair if the 1st one is fair. While I admit that this seems cheap when you look at level 2 Modifiers of other types, those other types lack the 2 stone cap, and typically speaking, are rarely taken at 2 levels. There is no +4 or +5 versions of these. 2 stones is not game breaking.

Talented and Innate are my 'weaker' versions of the Action to Modifier I've had people try to add to at least 2 char-gens in any online game I've run. +3 for something that still requires a stone to use, stays in the 9-action limit and thus 2-action-per-panel restriction vs +3 for free stones all over.

The Energy problem doesn't get fixed by finding ways to throw more free stones out there; the Energy problem gets fixed when you find ways to limit the availability of free stones. The game is built and balanced around the idea of resource allocation, intending that limited access to energy is going to create an inherent balance within the system. It fell apart when access to the General Pool became too easy, making combat incredibly static and with pre-determined winners.

This I completely disagree with. The game-breaker is that people feel useless for more than half the panels in a game. A system needs to allow them to be useful each Panel, and thus feel like Super Heroes. Especially in a basic-scenario, 40 stone game. As a GM, countering these things is easy, and this isn't a PvP game. So, by 'fixing' the only real problem of people feeling useless half the time, doesn't break anything at all. There is no breakage from having General Pools unless you are able to depend on them non-stop (which at 2 stones, isn't going to happen).

All of my solutions force the player to still have a decent energy pool and regeneration with the possible exception of Talented which only requires 50% of your pool to be used. This includes Innate which should be balanced in what it's allowed in.

[Brainstem]

The problem with basing the pricing off AtM is that, as you've stated, it's worth more than what you pay for it. The logic behind Multitasking's price isn't sound simply because you've stated within your post that +3 AtM is too much.

Players feel useless because they aren't playing to the system, they're playing like players; they blow their load early in the Encounter, have to putz around while they regenerate, then do the same thing, rather than budget what they have to ensure that they stay viable the whole time. This is highlighted when you have NPCs (or PCs) with gratuitous amounts of General Pool stones; players are going to have to burn out in order to do anything, which is fine in limited situations, making them feel inept. Likewise, players with too many free stones are going to necessitate enemies that are designed specifically to counteract the one or two players, which makes them pissed off because they can't do what they've twinked out to do and the other players pissed because their characters can't do anything.

With a quick scan of the characters in the Core Book, a MN of +2 seems to be standard for super-powered characters, +3 in instances of exceptional expertise (like Wolverine's Claws), and +1 to just highlight that a non-powered character has a good deal of talent with something (like Kingpin's +1 Toughness). The only characters that have Modifiers higher than +3 are either the ones that use that Modifier as their main power (Bullseye's Targeting or Thing's Toughness) or the ones that are on a scale a touch higher than your run-of-the-mill character (Silver Surfer, Ultron, etc.).

[Gryphynx]

I don't know... I think AtM is only too powerful when applied directly to an Action. I find it balancing when used as I've done with MultiTasking because, again, of the 2-stone cap applied. And it's not like I haven't tested this in games. Before I heard of Efficiency this is the method I used and ended up with about the same result. When someone would apply +1 for Efficiency and spend 4 stones (to not burn out their energy) for 6, the same things would happen in my game where someone would take MultiTasking. The numbers seem to come out the same since most people will have that one primary action that they like to do most every Panel.

I appreciate and respect the negative feedback, but I don't think you're looking at it open mindedly. Especially if you think Efficient is ok, but the Modifiers aren't (though admittedly, I've never actually had anyone do the Multi-Taking Improved, that idea came up after I learned about Efficiency, but haven't had anyone test it in game since our table-top group quit playing this game)

Anyhows, I agree that players play like players and blow their load early in the Encounter. My objective isn't to try to teach them to play some other way, it's to make the way they play work for them. I don't believe it my job to "teach" people how to roleplay. I believe it my job as a GM to make sure the players are enjoying themselves, and whirling around in circles waiting for energy to regen hasn't proven to be one of those ways to do that, for me. These rules... they seem to do that for me.

Anyhows, the fact that I don't think I've received a single character sheet since I got back on these boards that didn't have either Efficiency nor the Durability Split option, seems that most people disagree with your premise that the answer is to budget their stones instead of find a way to make their character less personal-energy dependent...

[Brainstem]

The Durability split is exactly what I'm proposing. You give them more control over their energy so they can use it more intelligently.

My concern is that you're changing the nature of the game. The game is based around budgets and allocation of stones; the more access to free stones you give, the more you change the fundamental mechanic. If your players aren't adjusting to the play style of this game, then maybe it'd be better to try a better system than to patch this one into oblivion.

Also, I'm certainly approaching this with an open mind; being open-minded isn't the same as accepting everything placed your way. I would also appreciate that criticisms of my argument go against my argument and not myself.

[Gryphynx]

When I state that I don't think you looked at it with an open mind, I didn't mean it as an affront against you. I mean it in that, there's not a balance difference between one thing you like, and one thing you claim to to be unbalanced.

The Durability split is -as- broken as any other system. If you were to have Durability 3 (3w) and thus 3 regen and 9 energy, you will likely increase it to 6 regen for 3 additional White (assuming you're an optimizer, that's the best call) and get 3 extra stones a turn for it. My system gives you 2 extra stones a turn for 4 additonal White, and no option to do better.

You can't honestly say the Durability one is better because it's less powerful.

If you go Durability 4 (12 energy, 4 regen), the 2nd most common value I see in Durability, then you'll spend 2 extra stones for +2 more to Regen (taking it to 6). Again, my system requires 4 extra stones to get +2 per panel. Twice as expensive as Durability-Split.

When I say not open-minded it's not because I wish to attack you, and I apologize for it. It's because I'm of the opinion that an open-minded person would actually sit back and calculate how bad it is before making judgements instead of just 'feeling' that it's unbalancing.

Now, thanks to the first 2 posts, people are going to look at my House Rules, see the first 2 people thought it insane crazy, and not bother to actually try it because it feels like the general consensus is that it's bad rules. When, in fact, it's less broken than what the same people feel is balanced.

[WildKnight]

I'm going to say this once, and then I'm going to go back to my corner and continue not giving a crap.

Brainstem and I know what we're talking about. We've been here, on this board, doing this for years. We were here when the "house rules to save the system" revolved around rules exactly like what your're proposing. VCJsmoke proposed your "Talented" (Under a different name ) YEARS ago. We've seen what happens when you inflate the number of Modifier stones floating around. We know the results. We know how completely NOT fun the game becomes under those circumstances.

So, take what he's saying or leave it. I don't care.

[Ricochet]

I don't understand what the fuss is about. Talented is a lesser version of Action to Modifier, or a better version of Efficiency. The price should be about +1.5 to Costlevel, so Gryphynx rounds up to +2. It seems perfectly reasonable to me.
And besides that, he can play the game anyway he wants to.

[WildKnight]

Sept 30, 2011 14:50:39 GMT -5 Ricochet said:

I don't understand what the fuss is about. Talented is a lesser version of Action to Modifier, or a better version of Efficiency. The price should be about +1.5 to Costlevel, so Gryphynx rounds up to +2. It seems perfectly reasonable to me.
And besides that, he can play the game anyway he wants to.

The "fuss" is that everybody knows AtM is broken, so using it as a pricing guideline is inherently flawed.

No one is telling him how he can or can't play the game. Presumably, he posted his ideas here because he wanted the opinions of people who understand the workings of the system. He can run his games any way he pleases, with any set of rules he pleases. That doesn't mean we have to agree to them or like them.

Personally, when I see rules like these, I walk away. They're too exploitable and I feel like if I don't exploit them, the people that will, will always have better characters than me. Best not to play at all.

[Gryphynx]

So, exploit them then WK. Instead of just saying it, throw some numbers our way. I'm glad to try to see your point, but right now it revolves around Faith (trust us...), and I'm not a very Faith oriented sort of person...

Personally, I'd be just as happy to see Talented as a +3 Advantage. I put it at +2 because at +3, people seem more likely to try converting Psycho Centric Template to their needs, and I don't like that.

The system is setup, based on my years of experience both on these boards and tabletop (seeing how you think that gives credit to thoughts ), so that MN+3 gives a Modifier to a single Action (Action to Modifier). MN+4 for 2 Actions or stackable with other MN+4 actions (Claws, Dodge, Toughness), MN+5 for a group of like-themed actions. That's the current system of Modifiers.

So, when you say AtM is broken, you say that the whole system is broken, every one of the bonuses to Action Modifiers. While I won't go into if/how it's broken, I will say that I find these addendums to the rules a better solution than to modify or delete a whole slew of rules, which is the only way to really justify a comment like saying that AtM is broken. This system is to create an alternative to the Animal Senses 1, Reflexive Dodge 4, Toughness 3, PsiWeapon -2 No LoEs combo.

And more importantly, it's a tested system, and the only person that's tested it instead of just looking at it and giving 2-thumbs down before trying it, is me.

Now, if you want to say that the way to balance it is to increase the cost, add some limitations, that makes some amount of sense. But a... "I didn't get past Talented. WAY too powerful" is just plain old rude (not that I mind rude, it's just not very helpful). To call it all too powerful before you read more than 1/4th of it is just... well, it doesn't lend credence to the opinion...

[WildKnight]

As I said, by all means, if you think these rules are functional, rock on with your bad self.

For me, "Modifier Heavy" MURPG is a "been there, done that, got the t-shirt, got so bored with the game that I almost quit gaming here entirely."

YMMV

[Gryphynx]

Understandable, seriously. I felt the same way, in a manner of speaking, about the non-modifier, run around for 2 panels for every panel of action, gaming technique.

But... not over powered. There's a huge difference between just a different gaming system, and an overpowered gaming system, which is what you deemed this list. I've shown that it's not overpowered (though dropping the 2nd MultiTasking might be a good idea), since it stays well within the parameters of rules others have identified as not overpowered such as the Durability-Split rule.

The only thing left is that some just don't like it, and that's a matter of taste, nothing else. And in truth, this doesn't make it a "modifier heavy" game, it makes it a "modifier alternative" game, where you don't have all your CAD Submission with the same Durability-Split levels. Variety makes the game much more interesting than everyone being mirrors of each other.