|
Post by vjcsmoke on Feb 14, 2009 13:46:54 GMT -5
Rule 1) Improving an action costs 10 LOE + the current AN of the action. Rule 2) A minimum of 5 LOE will be awarded per issue. Rule 3) Premiums may be placed on actions by GM. A 1 star premium costs an additional LOE to increase in level, A 2 star premium costs an additional 2 LOE to increase in level, A 3 star premium costs an additional 3 LOE to increse in level. Rule 4) Modifiers may be increased at the cost of 20 LOE + the MN in LOE plus any premiums placed on an action related to the modifier. Rule 5) Abilities may be increased at the cost of 20 LOE + the Ability number unless it would violate human norms. Rule 6) New, non-superpowered abilities may be learned for 5 LOE + CL adjustment.
How it works.
Storm has CC 3. She wants to increase this to CC 4. So she pays 13 LOE to increase it to CC 4.
Storm has Mastery of Weather 7. The GM has placed a 2 star premium on Mastery of Weather. So Storm must pay 17LOE plus 2 LOE premium for a total of 19 LOE to increase her Mastery of Weather to 8.
Storm has an INT of 4. She studies hard and wants to increase her INT to 5. Storm pays 20 LOE + 4 LOE for a total of 24 LOE to increase her INT to 5.
Any questions?
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 14, 2009 14:03:55 GMT -5
Oh man, I hate complicated rules for LOEs. Here's my take. Rule 1) Improving an action costs 10 LOE + the current AN of the action. A flat 10 LOEs is fine by me. I don't see the need for this, but maybe we just disagree. KISS is the deciding factor for me. Guidelines are better than rules here. Sometimes an issue is short, sometimes its long. GMs should be free to award whatever they feel like. 5 LOEs for a good solid issue is a good guideline, but that's all. That's not a bad suggestion. I can imagine some circumstances where it would be fair. I don't think Modifiers need to be so expensive to buy up - however, I think the GM should have final say on what can and can't be purchased. I use the example of someone trying to spend LOEs on Wolverine's claws - it just shouldn't happen at all. If something CAN reasonably be bought higher, then the standard cost is fine to me. I also think Abilities should be only 10 LOEs each. It's simple. They aren't necessarily inherently more valuable than Actions - and if they are, its silly to say that 20 LOEs is exactly how much more valuable they are. KISS. I like this. We've badly needed a new rule for learning that first dot of a new, mundane ability. 5 LOE + CL adjustment sounds about right. ~TWF How it works. Storm has CC 3. She wants to increase this to CC 4. So she pays 13 LOE to increase it to CC 4. Storm has Mastery of Weather 7. The GM has placed a 2 star premium on Mastery of Weather. So Storm must pay 17LOE plus 2 LOE premium for a total of 19 LOE to increase her Mastery of Weather to 8. Storm has an INT of 4. She studies hard and wants to increase her INT to 5. Storm pays 20 LOE + 4 LOE for a total of 24 LOE to increase her INT to 5. Any questions?[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Feb 14, 2009 14:16:23 GMT -5
Well, can only repeat what TwF has said..
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 14, 2009 14:48:20 GMT -5
Yeah... full agreement with TWF..
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 14, 2009 14:49:36 GMT -5
Yeah... full agreement with TWF.. It does happen from time to time, eh? ^__^ ~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 14, 2009 14:51:39 GMT -5
LOL!
|
|
|
Post by vjcsmoke on Feb 14, 2009 18:52:09 GMT -5
The only reason that I'm suggesting 10 + AN is this, the higher the AN the more powerful the action becomes. There should be some additional premium to reflect this.
Is Telepathy 1 as strong as Telepathy 2? How about Telepathy 7? 1.0 is the one of the few systems where I've seen it cost you the same to upgrade a power no matter how strong it becomes, 10 LOE. It's not very hard to figure out how much it costs to upgrade to your next AN number, its 10 LOE plus your current AN. Really the math is easy as it gets.
The 5 LOE min per issue only comes into play to compensate for the increasing costs of increasing your AN.
1.0. To rise from AN 1 to AN 9 = 80 LOE. 2.0 To rise from AN 1 to AN 9 = 116 LOE.
Another possible variant is that adding a +1 option to an action costs 10 LOE + your AN. If you're adding a +2 option, its 20 LOE + AN. This helps curb the rise of overpowered mastery packages.
Modifiers add FREE stones to an action. They are INHERENTLY more valuable. Combat Prowess +3 adds 3 free stones to close combat. Combat Prowess +4 adds 4 free stones to close combat. On the other hand increasing your CC action from 3 to CC 4 only gives the player the ability to assign more stones from their energy pool to their CC. Thus modifiers are at least twice as valuable + the level of the modifier.
There IS NO standard cost for increasing modifiers in 1.0. It CANT BE DONE in 1.0 That's why I'm giving a standard formula to do it here for 2.0.
And again Strength 6 is inherently more advantageous than Strength 5. Int 6 is inherently more advantageous than Int 5. Not to mention that your abilities affect your defense in the defense matrix. So it is more than reasonable to charge 20 LOE + Ability number to upgrade it to the next level.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 14, 2009 21:32:43 GMT -5
Actually dude.... on that Abilities things... he said to prove that they are more inherently valuable than ACTIONS... not the next number in the chain....
Which honestly, even though the contribute to the Defense Matrix, they're not more valuable... I'd place them at about the same level of importance.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 14, 2009 23:46:22 GMT -5
The only reason that I'm suggesting 10 + AN is this, the higher the AN the more powerful the action becomes. There should be some additional premium to reflect this. Is Telepathy 1 as strong as Telepathy 2? How about Telepathy 7? 1.0 is the one of the few systems where I've seen it cost you the same to upgrade a power no matter how strong it becomes, 10 LOE. It's not very hard to figure out how much it costs to upgrade to your next AN number, its 10 LOE plus your current AN. Really the math is easy as it gets. I get that (I'm not stupid, honestly) but we never had a problem with that in 1.0, did we? Again, I get that. I'm not an idiot. If you read what I posted you'd see that I think it should be a guideline not a hard rule. I get the reason for it, I just don't think we should force GMs to hand out what we think is appropriate. There will be situations where a Modifier is worth more than another point of AN, but I promise you it will sometimes be the other way around, too. Some Actions come with free specialties, for starters. Some Actions have features that depend entirely on your AN, not the number of stones in your box. Also, we're trying to take measures to limit how much of a Modifier you can apply - there's only so much you can use. It isn't a terrible idea to up the cost, but I don't think it's necessary to screw with simplicity. I'll keep this in mind when I do my playtest - perhaps my mind will change. You missed my point by that much. I agree that some Modifiers should be bought up with LOEs - we just disagree on the price. We just disagree, that's all. I understand your reasons, I just think they're wrong. If you're going to take into account the difference between AN 5 and AN 6, how will you account for the fact that some Actions are simply worth more than others? Social Skills is only AN +0 at character creation, but Telepathy with enough options might be AN +20. Surely an extra point of Telepathy would be worth more than Social Skills.. do you have a formula for that? How complicated does it have to get? There are all kinds of different factors that make one increase more or less valuable than another. It's too much for me to bother trying to even out with a point here or a point there. Again, I haven't encountered a problem with the flat 10 LOEs system. Maybe we've just had different experiences and I should count myself lucky. ~TWF
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Feb 15, 2009 6:23:31 GMT -5
Hmm.. If some players have to spend more LoE than others (lets say they get more or less the same), won't they start lacking behind and feel like they are "standing still"?
Also, if you start feeling like upgrading your Thieving of AN 2, it wont really be worth it since its way to expensive.. AN 3: 13 LoE AN 4: 14 LoE AN 5: 15 LoE Ect...
I Might charge less for the first two levels in a Action, since having something at 1 or 2 mostly will have little effect..
|
|
|
Post by alanee on Feb 15, 2009 11:20:49 GMT -5
As for the Action improvement cost, I think that what we have now is good, but... to express that some Actions are more worthy (and costly) than others, perhaps we should just use this formula:
10 + CL adjustment?
So, to improve Social Skills 3 to 4, you just need 10 LoEs, but to improve Phoenix Force, you'd need 10+13=23 LoEs.
I've seen doing so in one of the games, I don't know which and how it was working, but the idea seems to be quite good?
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 15, 2009 11:26:48 GMT -5
I think that puts a little too much pressure on the base cost of an Action. They aren't that well balanced that we can use them as constants in formulas for everything. There will always be a little imbalance in the game - what's important is that we cut out what is easy to cut out, and accept and simplify what isn't.
~TWF
|
|
|
Post by alanee on Feb 15, 2009 11:29:15 GMT -5
Yeah, I get what you mean, it'd make Masters/Telepaths or others who bought a lot of advantages to their Actions weaker because of their slow improvement rate. And it'd simply complicate the game.
|
|
|
Post by vjcsmoke on Feb 16, 2009 12:16:53 GMT -5
So you're suggesting that modifiers and abilities can be improved for a flat 10 LOE? How is this balanced?
Spiderman can become as strong as Juggernaut for the price of 30 LOE?
You can upgrade your forceblast modifier from a +3 to a +6 and double your free stones for 30 LOE?
Come on. Really? This is a SHOCKINGLY liberal proposal from you TWF.
============== OK NEW PROPOSAL.
Action improvement costs:
AN 0-1: 5 LOE + CL adjustment (Learn a new action)
AN 1-3: 5 LOE AN 4-7: 10 LOE AN 8-10: 15 LOE
Total costs to increase from 1 to 10 = 15 + 40 + 45 = 100 LOE
Low level actions quickly improve, mid level actions improve at the normal rate, high level actions improve at a slower rate. This more accurately reflects higher difficulty level of mastering actions at the top levels.
|
|
|
Post by takewithfood on Feb 16, 2009 12:22:10 GMT -5
If you've seen my games you'd know it isn't a shocking proposal - this is how I run my games. (EDIT: And I'm talking about within natural limits, here. Spider-Man's strength is clearly out of the natural limit.)
If there is a balance issue with the generic modifiers, then let's make them cost a little more, if absolutely necessary. But claiming that all modifiers are inherently better than any Action is short-sighted.
EDIT EDIT: Also, a big part of the problem with allowing a Modifier to increase from +3 to +6 for only 30 LOEs is that the GM is allowing the Modifier to increase from +3 to +6 at all. What the hell kind of Modifier is that?
~TWF
|
|