|
Post by Neros on Feb 5, 2009 10:41:24 GMT -5
So fare, I can't see any problems with the current cost level system.. I think the only problem was the price which was given for Actions, options and modifiers..
I haven't read to much about the suggested system, but just to be sure I understand it: When you want a power, you have to find out what area of power it lies at.. Depending on what level it is, it will decide what cost it has per AN.. If a power had reacged Gamma level, it would cost 4 stones per AN... So if you have a AN of 5, it would cost 25 stones..
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 5, 2009 11:29:30 GMT -5
well.. 20, but you get the basic idea....
I'm trying to turn the Actions from gaggle of +CLs into a clear, defined system of tiers that can be used by anyone. The problem has become, to me anyway, Masteries... but I think I have that solved by just seperating them into their core components. Creation/Manipulation of Elements, Energy Projection, Immunity/Absorption of Element, Defense using Element.
If we just break it down into those 4 base objects, the problem of Masteries is solved.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 5, 2009 11:35:50 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm still unclear as to what you're proposing to fix, Dio. You say you're trying to get rid of a gaggle of +CLs, but how are you going to deal with advantages? If you take a Beta-level Action, add x2 damage, armor penetration, out of control without a device, and doesn't aid others (for example), you're still dealing with a gaggle of +/- CLs.
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Feb 5, 2009 11:37:37 GMT -5
And I'm not convinced that the "gaggle" of +/- cost levels was ever a problem. I've yet to meet anybody who didn't understand character creation in MURPG.
|
|
|
Post by soban on Feb 5, 2009 12:27:03 GMT -5
I think having one cost chart is the best way to go with +/- on that chart representing how powerful it is.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 5, 2009 14:48:36 GMT -5
*points to Soban* See? See? I'm not crazy... Someone agrees with me... I think....
To me it's just simpler to go "Ok... what's this power's ranking.... It's Gamma? Ok so that's 4 points per Rank.." then it is to go "Ok... +3 CL... I want to get it at a rank 5... that's 3.. no wait... 9 stones...
As for advantages... they would add ranks upping the power's rating (thus if you were to have a Delta Level Power, adding 2x damage onto it, using it's old CL as a Rank Modifier, makes it a Gamma Level power now. Want to add an Ability Bonus onto a power? It's going to move up 2 ranks... and go from Delta to Beta...) It's just for simplicity and streamlining's sake.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 5, 2009 15:17:30 GMT -5
See, that strikes me as more complicated. You're still adding and subtracting advantages, so that's no better or worse. But then there are five different price charts instead of one.
It's well worth testing out, though. I'm willing to try to make some CADs using a couple different cost charts.
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 5, 2009 19:04:38 GMT -5
Hmmm... Playtest... We could do that... I'll set up a thread... We should (Everyone interested in playtesting this) Make CADs...
I'm going to say, since we're going to be using the Blue Stone thing (we ALL agree that idea was inspired...), 120 stones + 30 stones of flaws (standard game)
Simple rules
For Actions and Modifiers, use their current CL as the mode of where they lie onthe power chart... The action "Personalized Action" is the only one that qualifies for Epsilon-Delta...
For Abilities, they are +0cl, so they would cost as Delta powers... Remember to multiply Durability cost by 3 (We might as well for this.)
I'll make my CAD later tonight, but I'll be making the Thread now... We'll make our CADs, post them, run some mock battles, and stuff and see how it works.
|
|
|
Post by soban on Feb 9, 2009 23:00:12 GMT -5
Dio, I've been watching your play test and the more I watch it the less I like your system for A/A/M costing. Therefore, I'm proposing the following cost chart. Prices of actions depending on their power and usefulness have various +/- modifiers on it.
Power=Cost 1=1 Blue 2=2 Blue 3=3 Blue 4= 6 Blue 5 = 9 Blue 6 = 12 Blue 7 = 18 Blue 8 = 27 Blue 9 = 36 Blue 10 = 45 Blue 11+ = +15 Blue
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 9, 2009 23:58:32 GMT -5
Dude... the Playtest hasn't even started yet.... we've been discussing Flavor Actions for this entire time... What have you based your findings on?
|
|
|
Post by soban on Feb 10, 2009 7:55:46 GMT -5
1. as WK said, Straight cost = terrible idea, all around. what you have is six levels of straight costs. 2. Having abilities at Delta level makes me able to put 10's in all my abilitys. (if I'm reading it that at one point per level it costs 1 so 10 means I pay 10.) same with gamma and I dont thing just the fact that I'm strong is a beta level thing.(and I can only buy 3 in all stats, barely superhuman.) The same goes for close and ranged combat. why not have an AN of 10 in them? 3. There is not really that much of a penalty for getting a higher AN. Higher ANs make the action much more powerful. (restating what WK said. straight cost does not seem like a good idea.)
|
|
|
Post by prodigy on Feb 11, 2009 17:35:24 GMT -5
I'm all for the original version of costing actions and what not.
|
|
|
Post by UrbanBlue on Feb 11, 2009 17:59:44 GMT -5
Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by vjcsmoke on Feb 11, 2009 23:37:19 GMT -5
Ok I was doing some independant thinking and finally came to the same conclusion you did. If you want to get rid of the thirds in marvel, you have to scale everything up by a multiple of 3.
This means that the de facto 40+10 whites now must be increasted to a MINIMUM of 120 + 30 blues. This is going to yield some ungodly looking stone counts... but scales according to the 1.0 system. Man this gives me a headache looking at it but I'll try to use it in my calculations from here on out.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 11, 2009 23:43:45 GMT -5
Would something ever cost, say, 13 blue for some reason? And if so, how is that much better than 4 white 1 red?
~TWF
|
|