|
Post by malice on Jul 29, 2007 18:43:22 GMT -5
Awhile ago I said I would try and revise the equipment guidelines found in the Avenger's Guide to be more accessible and cheaper. I'm about 2 months overdo for that promise so here's me delivering:
Disclaimer: I expect to have to edit this. The way I'm choosing to do it is to basically re-do everything that's written in the Guide and make edits where I see fit.
These are house-ruled equipment guidelines based on those presented on page 90-91 of the "Guide to the Hulk and the Avengers". They're not much different, but there are differences.
Close Combat Weapons: Cost Level = Modifier # (as opposed to Modifier # + 1 level)
Close Combat Modifiers: Add Modifier # + 4 Cost Level. Like claws, these are just untyped bonuses to Close Combat.
Ranged Combat Weapons: Cost Level = Modifier # +1 Level. (This is unchanged from the book)
Armor: Cost Level = Modifier # +3 (Unchanged)
If a weapon is Armor Penetrating: Add Weapon Modifier # 3 Cost Levels.
Nullifies Armor Penetration: +1 to Cost Level (Just like the option on Toughness). If it doesn't have a Cost Level (i.e. doesn't have a modifier number) then add 2 white stones extra.
Nullifies 2x damage: +1 to Cost Level. If it doesn't have a Cost Level (i.e. doesn't have a modifier number) then add 2 white stones extra. (Notice it doesn't specify what it nullifies 2x damage from just that it nullifies 2x damage)
Weapons more powerful than allowed: (Unchanged from the book)
[glow=blue,2,300]COMBAT EQUIPMENT[/glow] Equipment that acts like Modifiers: Pay for it just as if you were paying for the modifier.
Equipment that acts like Abilities: Pay for the difference between the enhanced ability and your ability without the equipment. Example: You have a strength of 4 and want a piece of equipment that increases it to 6, pay 2 white stones (the cost difference between level 4 and 6).
For equipment that is like an Action but the stones are free:
Stone Cost of item_|_|Additional cost for making stones free 1r-stone item-------| |Cost 1 red stone extra 2r-stone item-------| | Cost 2 red stones extra 1w-stone item------| | Cost 1 white stone extra 2w-stone item------| | Cost 2 white stones extra 3w-stone item------| | Cost 3 white stones extra 4w-stone item------| | Cost 4 white stones extra (as opposed to 6) 5w-stone item------| | Cost 6 white stones extra (as opposed to 9)
For items of 6 or more stones, add +3 to Cost Level or 9 white stones, whichever is less. The +3 to Cost Level is on the aspect for which you want the stone to be free, or to the most expensive aspect in the case of items with multiple free-stone aspects.
Items that add directly to (combine with) an Ability, Action or Modfier: +3 to Cost Level. (Unchanged)
Exclusive or "Choosy" equipment: Cost 1 white stone extra
Item with multiple aspects that cannot be used at the same time: Pay for the most expensive aspect and any others which can be used simultaneously at full price, then pay 2 white stones for each additional aspect that can't be used at the same time as the most expensive aspect (or the price of the aspect, whichever is less).
The rest is unchanged from the book.
|
|
|
Post by Grimsolace on Jul 29, 2007 22:03:32 GMT -5
Ranged weapons also come with a "collateral damage" disadvantage as well as "x2 Damage". The cost should stay the same, but you should site both or else people will think it should be AN+2 instead.
I can understand why Armour costs AN+3, but I personally feel it shouldn't cost as much as Reflexive Dodge or Toughness. A persons natural modifiers should always cost more then a piece of equipment in my book.
"If it doesn't have a Cost Level (i.e. doesn't have a modifier number)"
This phrasing is unclear to me, what do you mean? That if you spend 6 stones on an item it give all of your attacks AP, or if you by a +0 zip cord with AP (which should cost AN=0 + 3 (for AP) or 1WS) would cost six stones by itself?
Finally, Equipment that acts like a Modifier/Action Costs too much, unless there are some rather special restrictions, or the person who gets it is a die-hard role player, I can't someone would spend the same number of stones on an item that could be lost/stolen/destroyed as simply gaining the power as an action.
|
|
|
Post by Scriptus on Jul 29, 2007 22:38:42 GMT -5
I was thinking about the retractable option on claws the other day. I know the most common interpretation of the rule is that the retractable advantage is a cosmetic thing. I'm Wolverine and I don't want every one to know I have knives growing out of my hands.
I want to offer another take on it. Let's say claws is a generical close combat modifier. Taking the retractable option also allows you to not factor in your close combat modifier when doing damage. This allows a hero to KO some one instead of crave them to ribbons. An example I think of would be someone with super dense skin. I have always thought that a form of "claws" could be appropriate for someone like that without making them pay for the extra cost of making them retractable. The rational being that when ever they slug someone it would be like hitting metal and add a little extra damage. This couldn't be "retracted" and therefore would always apply to anyone they hit.
The point of all this is to bring out the possibility that retractable close combat mods could have the possibility of being more than a cosmetic issue.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Jul 29, 2007 23:57:13 GMT -5
Ranged weapons also come with a "collateral damage" disadvantage as well as "x2 Damage". The cost should stay the same, but you should site both or else people will think it should be AN+2 instead. I don't understand. This one is unchanged from the book. I'm really not sure what you mean here. I kept it the same because armor stacks with other defensive modifiers, as they say in the book. I agree natural modifiers are better and should be better than those from equipment. My only problem with it is that someone who doesn't want toughness still has to pay for it basically the same way, so all this pricing does is safeguard against abuse rather than free anyone's stones up (which was my original intent). Yeah this one is wierd, the only thing I thought of it applying to was Steal Superpower, and you would basically ignore their clothes (and therefore be freed of the restriction of touching skin). I think I probably should've just dropped any mention of 6 white stones from the AP stuff, but thought maybe someone had a use for it. I agree that if a person wants to buy a modifier they should consider the modifier rather than equipment to do the same thing. At first I thought the cost should be lowered, but here's what I thought of next: A mutant with Reconstitute Self who meets someone with Suppress Mutant Powers. His Reconstitute Self is de-activated when he dies so he doesn't reconstitute. It occurred to me that this would be the reason that equipment was worth as much as the modifier itself, because while in most ways it's easier to take away, it's harder to remove in others. If the mutant had a bracelet that gave him reconstitute self then it wouldn't have been deactivated like his powers. I also remembered that if you want with most pieces of equipment, you can give them to you allies to use. This is a powerful advantage although rarely used, and also justifies a higher cost. While enemies can also take them away and use them for themselves, I considered it more consequential to share it with allies than to lose it to enemies. I was thinking about the retractable option on claws the other day. I know the most common interpretation of the rule is that the retractable advantage is a cosmetic thing. I'm Wolverine and I don't want every one to know I have knives growing out of my hands. I want to offer another take on it. Let's say claws is a generical close combat modifier. Taking the retractable option also allows you to not factor in your close combat modifier when doing damage. This allows a hero to KO some one instead of crave them to ribbons. An example I think of would be someone with super dense skin. I have always thought that a form of "claws" could be appropriate for someone like that without making them pay for the extra cost of making them retractable. The rational being that when ever they slug someone it would be like hitting metal and add a little extra damage. This couldn't be "retracted" and therefore would always apply to anyone they hit. The point of all this is to bring out the possibility that retractable close combat mods could have the possibility of being more than a cosmetic issue. Actually all I did with the "Close Combat Modifiers" is add my own caption that explains why the developers put it in there. It's actually straight out of the book, not my own idea. It IS just a way to ignore the "inhuman appearance" challenge that normally comes with claws, which is why I called it a sleezy way to duck the +5 to cost level of retractable claws. Perhaps I should've just kept my commentary to myself on that one. You guys may have noticed that most stuff is relatively unchanged (you'll notice if you compare/read-along with the actual book). Sorry if that's disappointing, but my main intent was to make things cheaper and to make things more readable (which I obviously still need to work on.) I'll edit out my commentary on the Close Combat Modifiers and the 6 stones for MN-less AP. They're clearly unclear.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Jul 30, 2007 5:25:48 GMT -5
I think it looks good so far. Could use some polish (especially in the area of phrasing), but I'll definately be sending people here when they ask me about equipment as a GM...
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Jul 30, 2007 11:09:19 GMT -5
Thanks for letting me know about the post Malice Close Combat Weapons: This one sounds fine to me Close Combat Modifiers: Im not sure about this, but despite that, i think its ok Ranged Combat Weapons: Ranged weapons have 2xdamage and a higher chance of colleteral damage... But what about arrows or the like? Would they also gain the 2xdamage? If you made Captain Americas shield with this, it should have 2xDamage... Armor: Armor should stay the same... As said, the defense stacks... And besides that, you can give it to your allies (just like any other equipment) and it can be destroyed, unless made indestructible (at GMs discretion). Dident you forget that one Malice?? Indestructible 1w? If a weapon is Armor Penetrating: Long live Armor Penetration Nullifies Armor Penetration: Long live this as well... As long as my targets don't have it Nullifies 2x damage: 2xDamage is always nice COMBAT EQUIPMENTEquipment that acts like Modifiers: Again, this sounds fine enough... Equipment that acts like Abilities: Not sure about this one... This would mean a Strength 8 Character could get a item that enhanced his Strength to 10 for 6w.... Now that character can give the item to the weakest in the group and he will now run around with a Strength of 10 For equipment that is like an Action but the stones are free: Uuhm... Not so sure about this one... "Stone cost of item"... So a 1r stone item costs 1w? What about a 1w stone item?? Will it then cost 1w?? I liked the official rules better then... A 1 stone effect item would cost 2 additional white stones, a 2 stone 3 more, ect... Items that add directly to (combine with) an Ability, Action or Modfier: Okay Exclusive or "Choosy" equipment: Good old smasher... He would never leave me Item with multiple aspects that cannot be used at the same time: So lets say i have a weapon with +5 to Close, Range-Combat and Defense, but not defense while the others are used. I would then pay for the Close and Range-Combat aspect normally and then 2w for Defense? Why not just give the cheapest aspects a -1 to costlevel?... Like if you want a Item to add +5 to Close Combat and Range Combat (but not both at the same time), Close Combat would then get a discount...
|
|
|
Post by malice on Jul 30, 2007 18:28:20 GMT -5
Ranged Combat Weapons: Ranged weapons have 2xdamage and a higher chance of colleteral damage... But what about arrows or the like? Would they also gain the 2xdamage? If you made Captain Americas shield with this, it should have 2xDamage... If a person used arrows it would be up to the GM to give them a discount. He won't have 10 strength, he'll have 6 more white stones of strength. If the person has a strength of 3, then this means the item would increase their strength to 7 not 10 if it cost 6 white stones. Instead of giving you a new strength score, it adds to your current one. I always read those rules as the cost of the item not the stones of effect. If I've read them incorrectly then it's a mistake of understanding. Also I didn't include costs for less than 1w, I'll add them after this post. If it's for stones of effect not stone cost of item then I'll have to check it out. I thought of that, and I don't see anything wrong with that way of doing it. I just chose the 2 white instead. Either way feels superior to the original rules, which is what I was trying to do. Also I left off indestructible because it was unchanged just like the healing factor equipment and immobility. Basically I didn't see the point in re-typing a lot of stuff after I'd completed the stuff I edtied. The stuff that's in there that isn't changed I put in so it'd be easier to read along with the book, up to a point. Also, just for fun, here's Captain America's Shield according to my rules and the original Avenger's guide rules. Avenger's Guide: Captain America's Shield+6 to Close Combat (Armor Penetrating) 15wsor +6 to Ranged Combat (Armor Penetrating) 15wsor +6 to Defense 12wsIndestructible 1wsReturning 1wsTotal Cost: 44 white stonesHouse Rules: Captain America's Shield+6 to Ranged Combat (Armor Penetrating) 15wsor +6 to Close Combat (Armor Penetrating) 2wsor +6 to Defense 2wsIndestructible 1wsReturning 1wsTotal Cost: 21 white stones
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Jul 31, 2007 10:47:30 GMT -5
Hehe... When i tried to make Captain Americas shield with their own rules, i just went .... In the official book, it costs 26 stones... How could they make a cost for a weapon, and then give another cost in another book?? Was it completly different people who made the rules in each book??? But i still belive the extra cost is based on the effect of the item, as said, what if the item only costs 1r? But i cant see why 2w... It seems abit cheap...
|
|
|
Post by Grimsolace on Aug 2, 2007 17:24:53 GMT -5
"I don't understand. This one is unchanged from the book. I'm really not sure what you mean here."
I'm suggesting that the description of Ranged weapons should be changed from "(This is unchanged because firearms start with 2x damage)" to "(This is unchanged because firearms start with 2x damage advantage and collateral damage disadvantage)" To prevent confusion as to why Ranged weapons cost +1 instead of the +2 usually associated with x2 Dmg advantages.
"I kept it the same because armor stacks with other defensive modifiers, as they say in the book. I agree natural modifiers are better and should be better than those from equipment.
My only problem with it is that someone who doesn't want toughness still has to pay for it basically the same way, so all this pricing does is safeguard against abuse rather than free anyone's stones up (which was my original intent)."
There are many, many ways to abuse the system. As always it is the GM's job to prevent abuse. Armour shouldn't be as hard to get as bullet-proof skin, and they simply shouldn't cost the same.
"I also remembered that if you want with most pieces of equipment, you can give them to you allies to use. This is a powerful advantage although rarely used, and also justifies a higher cost. While enemies can also take them away and use them for themselves, I considered it more consequential to share it with allies than to lose it to enemies."
I disagree. A character based on an item, such as Captain America, becomes nearly inconsequential when they lose that item, whether they willingly give it up or not. No one wants to play a worthless character, very, very few people would ever give up such an important item, even fewer would bother with equipment while it costs the same to simply 'have' those abilities.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Aug 4, 2007 15:23:39 GMT -5
I yanked my explanation of Ranged Combat Weapons because it was unchanged from the book. I disagree. A character based on an item, such as Captain America, becomes nearly inconsequential when they lose that item, whether they willingly give it up or not. No one wants to play a worthless character, very, very few people would ever give up such an important item, even fewer would bother with equipment while it costs the same to simply 'have' those abilities. That's why I said the option was rarely used. I posted this so more people could work with it if they wanted, so I took into consideration what I'd seen people have problems with and what I hadn't. While I do feel things like armor could be a little cheaper, I tried to focus on those rules with the most complaints and left alone those rules with few. My reasoning was that people would more likely accept an upgrade if it wasn't too different from the present system. If it were a system for my use inside games and my games alone, things would probably be cheaper, but I also can watch my PCs more carefully then and flex my rules better. I posted this as a system that wouldn't need a lot of supervision, and such systems are always a little less forgiving.
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Aug 10, 2007 0:06:41 GMT -5
Ive been thinking, why not remove the 2xDamage and Colleteral Damage from Range Weapons? Range weapons allready have the advantage of Range (not seing the attacker before hes attacked is useful), so why more or less throw in for free 2xDamage?
|
|
|
Post by Brainstem on Aug 10, 2007 2:21:17 GMT -5
Because getting shot with a gun hurts a lot more than getting punched in the gut, pretty much.
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Aug 10, 2007 3:32:15 GMT -5
But you arent just being punched in a gut... You are being attacked by a +X weapon... And what if its not a gun? What if its a bow or maybe even something completly different?
Another thing that striked me later was ammunition... Im not sure if the rules where meant to be used for ammunition based weapons (however, it seems like it since they called them guns), so there should be some kind of ammunition for the darn thing... But how much? Depending on what kind of ammunition it is, it would either be easy to get or hard... But some things dosent have ammunition or returns when thrown... Would that then be +Xw or +X To Cost Level??
|
|
|
Post by Brainstem on Aug 10, 2007 12:17:11 GMT -5
I think it was stated somewhere in the book to not worry about ammunition. If a player's running through loads of rounds, then sure, make them reload. Otherwise it's just too much bookkeeping to worry about.
And for ranged weapons, I'm pretty sure only firearms get the 2x damage. I always assumed this was due to all the physics behind the way a bullet penetrates the skin.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Aug 10, 2007 15:06:17 GMT -5
It is only guns (unless you buy equipment with the specific advantage).
|
|