Add Ability Bonus discussion

[bikermatt]

I posted this to a thread in MURPG, but thought it should be here as a house rule/idea discussion.

I always thought the +5CL "extra bonus" was either pricey or munchkiney, depending on the bonus value in question. I came up with a solution, and like how most things, it came to me nearly whole-cloth while commuting (when I usually think of things).

Extra Bonus: 1 + 1/2 bonus value (in CL of the bonus).

The bonus value is determined by what you pay (or would pay) for the item/ability/action on Cost Level.

For an Ability, the cost level is equal to the ability, so a 3-4 would cost +3, and a 7-8 would cost +5.

For an Action, the modifier to the allowed effects would be the basis. If you have, say, Improved Drain Energy 3 at Range (CL 9), adding it to Close Combat would ignore the "At Range (+3)" part, treating it as CL 6, and providing a cost of +4.

For an item, the bonus limits how much you would recieve. For example, a gun that could be fairly easily lost (common), provides +2 stones, and x2 damage might be listed as equivalent to +6, requiring +4, but if you only bought +3 (weapon), you would either not recieve the bonus stones, or not the x2, or have to pay for the stones yourself, as only a CL 4 would be paid for.

Note: this does not apply to bonuses normally associated with the item, nor from combining 2 actions, just with the "extra bonus" advantage.'

What do all of you think (and no "it suxxorz" or "OMG way too complicated," if there's something wrong, I want to know what, exactly, and where.)

[takewithfood]

OMG way too complicated. It suxxorz. (I kid.)

I like the part about changing the cost of the "Ability Bonus" advantage. +5 CL has always been a little wonky. However, the price chart seems to work out this way:

Ability	Cost
1	+2 CL
2	+2 CL
3	+3 CL
4	+3 CL
5	+4 CL
6	+4 CL
7	+5 CL
8	+5 CL
9	+6 CL
10	+6 CL

Wouldn't this be a more simple solution: The cost of an Ability Bonus is equal to your Ability score in cost levels, up to a maximum of +5.

So, if you have Strength 3, you pay +3 CL. If you have Strength 7, you pay +5 CL. I know it doesn't work out to the exact same costs, but it is close enough and along the same curve, and doesn't require any math. (This is also essentially what the book suggests.. somewhere.. I think..)


As for the part about basically combining effects into one Action (if I'm interpreting that correctly), I'm against it. It's a little too powerful, I think.

~TWF

[Hypester]

I had to read this three times to understand any of it, I'm still not clear.

Basically you're saying, for abilities, at least Cost Level = 1 + 1/2 MN
But how do abilities have bonuses? Actions have bonuses... that's the first part that confused me.

Then, for actions, it sounds like you're saying Modifiers would be paid for at same rate that the actions themselves are. You can get a Improved Drain Energy Close Combat Weapon/Bonus at CL=MN+4... that's the same price as getting the action, so that sounds unbalanced.

I got totally lost on the item part, I'm sorry. I do agree that +5 is so pricey that no one would take it. I think +3 or +4 would have been more sound, as it would have assured that such bonuses would be taken on actions by people who are superhuman (As before such time, it would not have been cost effective. As is, the only time it even begins to make sense is when your Abilities are 6 and up.

I do see where you are with the 1 + 1/2 bonus value part, and I can see that potential.

[bikermatt]

To answer Hypester's questions in order:

Abilities are bonuses, so that's what applies. The modifiers for an Action may be what's confusing.

You need to have the Action you're using as a bonus in order to use it as a bonus, so to a degree, you're paying some of the cost all over again.

Modifiers are situational, and fall outside of the issue. Items are equipment, but provide a modifier as a bonus (a +3 sword gives 3 free stones when you use it in Close Combat), which may be what lost you there.


As for TWF's questions:

I thought about that, but then it's prefered in any situation where you want to get an effective AN above 10 (or eventually plan to), and doesn't solve the munchkin problem with high stats.

The "combining effects into one action" is basically taking a situation where you can take both of your actions to combine stones and saying that it only takes one action... for a cost.

[takewithfood]

Jul 5, 2010 2:09:24 GMT -5 @bikermatt said:

As for TWF's questions:

I thought about that, but then it's prefered in any situation where you want to get an effective AN above 10 (or eventually plan to), and doesn't solve the munchkin problem with high stats.

How are what I suggested and what you suggested really that different? The costs are only ever off by +1 CL, and only half the time.

Your suggestion also does not solve the munchkin problem. Someone with Speed 10 can add their Ability bonus to an Action for +6 CL. That is only +1 CL more than the cost out of the book.

The "combining effects into one action" is basically taking a situation where you can take both of your actions to combine stones and saying that it only takes one action... for a cost.

I don't think the cost is enough - I guess that's what I'm saying. You seem worried about munchkin characters up above, and yet you're willing to let people combine several actions into one.

Perhaps if you put a limit on how many Actions you can combine together (preferably 2, but 3 might be okay) then it wouldn't be so bad.

~TWF

[Dionon]

Bonuses aren't nearly as useful as Modifiers in all honesty... All they do is open up more stones that can be used... draining you all the more quickly. Granted there are those out there that can put out MONSTER amounts of stones, but in all honesty that means they're drained and vulnerable.

How bout this... keep additional Weapon Modifiers at +5 (They give free stones and are infinitely more useful than bonuses) and make Bonuses +1/2 the stat without that +1 originally... so it would run like this.

1 + 1
2 + 1
3 + 2
4 + 2
5 + 3
6 + 3
7 + 4
8 + 4
9 + 5
10 + 5

This way, it costs progressively more, but not incredibly so. I know it's close to what was originally suggested, but it's simpler this way without the 1+ stuff.... Honestly, If this suggestion wasn't here, I'd just lower it to a +3 and be done with it. Bonuses are practically worthless unless they are backed up by large quantities of energy/rengeneration.

I mean look at poor Spiderman. He can NEVER use his CC to it's fullest potential, as he only has 12 energy... but the potential is 13 stones of Close Combat... Poor Spiderman.

[terrorscarecrow]

How about (very little math here) bonuses cost half of an ability (rounded up) Everybody should be able to do it, and it means that things will cost about the same for high levels, but less for low levels.
The way my suggestion is different than Dionon's though is that you could add or subtract based on the action.

Ex: Acrobatics, Don't add any.
Ex: Mastery, Add 2 or 3. (or more)

Than it would be a little more house rule-y, and some work for GM's, but it makes it so the abilities are more evened out.

Sorry for any confusion that may result of my sleepy condition .

Oh! One final note: I'm thinking of a rule that would change the cost of an Ability Bonus (I came up with it before I read this thread) based on how well the Ability fit. Like if you added Strength to Shape Shifting, it would cost more than something like Intelligence (How would strength have an effect:You know what to do, and how people act better with Intelligence (or something like that). It would also add a little bit of role-playing, trying to explain why you can use Intelligence with Unstoppable..

[Shadowbane]

Jul 6, 2010 6:28:49 GMT -5 @terrorscarecrow said:

It would also add a little bit of role-playing, trying to explain why you can use Intelligence with Unstoppable..

You know where to strike the Wall/Object so that its easier to run through.

[bikermatt]

Well, the whole purpose of the discussion is to put it to an overall shakedown and see what the problems are...

I can already see what is iffy, such as the actions, which I added since they're very similar in stone-to-effect to abilities when treated as such (BTW, one can only have a total of 2 bonuses to an action, so none of that "bunches of strung-together actions" crap).

I'd put in the +1, since I felt it would balance things out a bit (and yes, I still feel like 1 level makes a significant difference).

Also, modifiers ARE more useful... to the tune of +3 CL according to the system's authors. Without drawbacks, a +3 gun (x2 damage) pretty much has a cost level of 8, making it on par with some of the best abilities around. Still, these are some usefull ideas.

[l3eta-00a1x]

Shadowbane, it doesn't matter how smart you are, if you can't punch down a pyramid of cards, I don't think you can break down walls. That would probably work for CC though, knowing Nerves and whatnot.

[Shadowbane]

Jul 13, 2010 18:07:28 GMT -5 l3eta-00a1x said:

Shadowbane, it doesn't matter how smart you are, if you can't punch down a pyramid of cards, I don't think you can break down walls. That would probably work for CC though, knowing Nerves and whatnot.

He didn't say it had to make sense. Unstoppable already has 2 options for it speed and strength, I wouldn't allow someone to add intelligence to it in the first place.

[l3eta-00a1x]

Well thats good! You'd kin of be a little submissive GM if you let that one slide... maybe.

[turnagealfonsojermaine]

Speaking of Ninja and Bonuses, how much should Ninja be reduced if you can't two weapon? All she can do is weapon with agility.

[Brainstem]

Don't resurrect dead threads to start an unrelated discussion.