|
Post by vjcsmoke on Feb 11, 2009 21:50:01 GMT -5
PS I believe the improvement to my defense matrix was suggested by Roc. So he should get some credit as well for adding on to the original idea.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 11, 2009 22:13:17 GMT -5
I'm sorry, I still don't like it for a few reasons:
1. It's inflexible. Every character with the same Str and Dur will have the same Toughness. That's too simplistic for me. While it's maybe a really good guideline, we should allow for characters who are tough without being energetic or strong.
2. It honestly feels like you just made up Will to have a 6th stat. I can't think of many other uses for Will, and I anticipate arguments about what Will actually represents (maybe I'm just paranoid, having seen and moderated dozens of arguments about what Wisdom and Charisma mean in D&D)
3. It doesn't address the fact that even the most ordinary human has Toughness 1 and Ref. Dodge 1. Athletic people have 4 stones of defense in total. That's messed, and while maybe it can be fixed, every fix is step away from KISS.
4. What was wrong with the old system? I didn't find it hard to buy Ref. Dodge or Toughness once at character creation and be done with it.
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 11, 2009 22:23:40 GMT -5
To No. 1: So take Flaws and Advantages to your Strength or Durability to increase/decrease that... Want to be tougher than you should... add CLs to one or the other... Want to be weaker, you get a discount.... Simple.
To No. 2: It's something this game has been missing... Personally I think there Should be an Ability bonus to Statecraft/Leadership and Social Skills, plus, in it's original conotation, it was supposed to oppose magic and mesmerism, as there really wasn't any automatic defenses against them.
To No. 3: Having 1 Reflexive Dodge and 1 Toughness isn't bad... did you read how it works... If it beats your Reflexive Dodge, the entire attack goes against your toughness... So 2 stones, you've just taken down a normal person.
To No. 4: Too expensive in my opinion. With so many heroes out there with the ability to shrug off high damage, there's no reason they should be so expensive. That and the fact that honestly, it wasn't really fluid...
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 11, 2009 22:41:08 GMT -5
I was talking to vjc, actually, but since you answered so thoughtfully: To No. 1: So take Flaws and Advantages to your Strength or Durability to increase/decrease that... Want to be tougher than you should... add CLs to one or the other... Want to be weaker, you get a discount.... Simple. It's easy to say that, but what does this cost? We have options for abilities now? Like I said, that's great and all, but we're getting further away from KISS. This is supposed to be a simple solution that takes away the "complication" of just buying Toughness and Ref. dodge. Now we're replacing that very uncomplicated process with options for advantages. That's just silly. I still think an ability bonus to Statecraft and Leadership is a bad idea (makes them too powerful). But a boost to Social Skills isn't a horrible idea, I guess, since the value of 1 stone or 5 stones is purely subjective. You're right, I did misunderstand that part. So, basically, Ref. Dodge is like Bad Luck in 1.0. However, I kinda like that even less. I think you should be able to partly dodge something. Taking a bullet as a graze is better than taking it between the eyes, know what I mean? Being able to shrug off high damage is USEFUL, which is why its expensive. And if you think it should be cheaper, lowering the cost is a much, much, much, much, much, much more simple solution than tossing the mechanic and all its functionality and elegance out with the bath water. There may also be a baby in there. ~TWF
|
|
|
Post by vjcsmoke on Feb 11, 2009 22:41:15 GMT -5
TWF got a point- that gives an avarage human both Toughness and Reflexive dodge at 1 (total of 2 defense static)- thats not right, unless there is a 0 stat for those who are UNDER avarage (like Aunt May would have 0 in most physical stats, for example). Actually, Ability 0 could help make a distinction between Avarage and Below Avarage people. Just one correction -- the defenses are not additive. If an attack defeats the static reflexive dodge defense, then that defense is ignored and it is compared directly vs toughness. Example: 2 stone attack against normal human with reflexive dodge 1, toughness 1. 2 stone attack defeats reflexive dodge 1. The attack was NOT avoided. Now compare 2 stone attack to toughness 1. 1 stone of damage is inflicted to target resulting in the loss of 1 health. Is allowing normal people a defense of 1 that gamebreaking? Probably not. Additonal thought. Nominal damage of 1 stone, ie a slap or 'rough housing' is not enough to hurt a normal person now. Whereas before, a paperclip hurled with 1 stone of energy will knock off a stone of health from a normal human who hadn't bought toughness. What mental fortitude does that Int alone did not, is also serve as a static defense vs magical attacks. So you no longer have to buy reflexive dodge, toughness, mental defense, energy defense, magical defense. You just buy your abilities, and your abililties determine your base static defenses.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 11, 2009 22:47:50 GMT -5
Sorry TWF, I can't help but answer sometimes lol...
But to rebut...
There's nothing complicated. Say you want to have a Toughness total of 6... But your Strength is 4, and your Durability (this is Health now, but still) is 4. Just add +1 to one or the other's cost until it evens out... (For this example, we have to make the average of the two be 6, so we'll up our Str and Hea by 2cls each, paying 4ws each instead of 2, Boom... now they even out to 6)
On the other hand... If you've say got a Strength of 10, and a Health of 7 (like the Hulk...) And don't want the Toughness of 8, you want a toughness of 6 (which is his actual now that I'm thinking about it) just tone down the cost of one or the other until it evens out... (In this example we have to drop the average by 2... So we would just drop the cost of both say by -2, so now instead of 15w, you pay 9w because your Strength isn't as useful as it was, and you pay 3w instead of 6w for your health, and now you have a Toughness of 6)
It's not hard
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 11, 2009 22:49:37 GMT -5
vjc, I'm still wondering what you propose for characters who have high Strength and/or Dur who don't want the Toughness. And the other way around, what about feeble characters who want to be tough?
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 11, 2009 22:51:58 GMT -5
*blinks*
I... just... did... that... out....
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 11, 2009 22:53:52 GMT -5
There's nothing complicated. Say you want to have a Toughness total of 6... But your Strength is 4, and your Durability (this is Health now, but still) is 4. Just add +1 to one or the other's cost until it evens out... (For this example, we have to make the average of the two be 6, so we'll up our Str and Hea by 2cls each, paying 4ws each instead of 2, Boom... now they even out to 6) Uhm, that makes zero sense. You're proposing: Strength 4 (effective strength 6 for determining Toughness) = CL 6 Durability 4 (effective strength 6 for determining Toughness) = CL 6 That costs the same as just buying Str 6 and Dur 6!!! Why the hell would anyone pay that? This is NOT simpler than just going "Gosh, I want Toughness 6. I add +3 CL and it costs me 12 white". It's one calculation. How could that be complicated? And if its expensive, charge +2 CL or +1 CL. ~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 11, 2009 22:56:59 GMT -5
v_v
It made sense to me *sniffle*
And... it works within what's established...But, I'll let VJC answer this... it's still his system.
|
|
|
Post by vjcsmoke on Feb 11, 2009 23:19:20 GMT -5
vjc, I'm still wondering what you propose for characters who have high Strength and/or Dur who don't want the Toughness. And the other way around, what about feeble characters who want to be tough? ~TWF Let me break this down into 2 parts. 1. What if Juggernaut wanted to take more damage? 2. What if pocket protector geek wanted super hard skin so he'd be difficult to hurt? Ok I'd like to explain the math but it would depend on how the cost level systems for 2.0 work out. Once we've settled on that all the calculations will be easier. Suffice it for now to say that someone with a high composite toughness that wants less gets a discount. And someone with a low toughness that wants more, has to pay more for that additional defense. Are we using blue stones now to get rid of the 1/3 stuff?
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 11, 2009 23:25:39 GMT -5
There's still some talk about blue stones, but several people (including me) don't see anything wrong with the old system.
If people have to pay more or less for higher or lower toughness, how is that simpler than just buying Toughness to begin with?
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 11, 2009 23:35:20 GMT -5
Yes... but the number one problem I saw in the old system was that now there is a Base defense to improve... not just "If you don't have one of our over-priced modifiers.... you're as inept as a 6 month old baby....
Personally I like this system...I tried to make it a little easier to get more defense, but oldie is a goodie with improving the static.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 11, 2009 23:41:27 GMT -5
There definitely was a shift towards defensive modifiers being the be-all-end-all on the battlefield (discounting Telepathy/Magic), but keep in mind that if we accept the Weapons as Effects rule (which I like), damage output will take a bit of an average drop.
Also, one of the reasons defensive stones were so sexy is that energy budgeting was a huge concern. You just didn't have stones to spare for shifting to defense... now, with choose-your-own Energy recovery and larger pools, they won't be as necessary. Useful still, for sure, but not as powerful as they once were.
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 12, 2009 0:14:31 GMT -5
Then let's leave the Static alone, and have additives and detractions be something that are purchased. They are simple, and the rule of thumb around here is KISS
|
|