|
Post by malice on Feb 21, 2009 16:20:04 GMT -5
The mechanics for combining actions in the original MURPG or splitting them were never well defined or developed as far as I know.
However, splitting and combining actions is one of the system mechanics that is absolutely necessary for properly pricing and designing Masteries. It's also extremely useful for creating original actions and characters.
Ever since learning the MURPG system I treasured the concept of "playing YOUR hero". The actions presented in the existing books are a great starting point, but no one who plays any game for awhile doesn't eventually want something that isn't available in print.
On to developing a fairly-priced and appropriately powered system for splitting and combining actions in MURPG 2.0...
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 21, 2009 16:25:05 GMT -5
If I understand it correctly the combining mechanics in original MURPG work like this:
Take two actions with similar effect and merge them into one with a new name. The lower action number of the two is the new action's action number.
Problem: Often this allows a player to avoid the appropriate cost for expensive advantages they might put on an action, however just as often the appropriate cost is too much for what the player wants to do.
The splitting mechanics of original MURPG work like this:
Divide an action into multiple actions that each accomplish an aspect of the action. They all share the same action number, and are priced according to the aspect of the action they perform.
Problem: This can allow a player to invest twice the energy in powerful efforts. It can also spread a well-intentioned player too thin. Finally, it's very tricky to price because it's optimal at certain levels and terribly expenseive at others.
Creating actions based on aspects of other actions in original MURPG works like this:
Take the advantage or aspect you want, create an Action whose you can choose (Basing it on the advantage works), the price of that action is AN + advantage cost. The action is a brand new and seperate action that only performs the functions you pay for, it has none of the other characteristics of the action you based it on.
Problem: Depending on the action you base this on, it can be a really horrible deal. Psychometry is a lame action at +2 to cost level. +1 or +0 would be more appropriate in many cases. However this one needs to be optimized because it's the one I see most often and frequently the most comprehensive (if not most cost-effective) way to create a new action
|
|
|
Post by Kaimontfendo on Feb 21, 2009 17:13:49 GMT -5
Well, this has a potential to quickly turn into a mess! But we've survived so far, which means anything is worth a shot.
For combining actions, I'll start with an example. Say a character has Close Combat 3 and Thieving 5. He decides he wants to combine them into a new action (like a really watered-down version of Ninja). Instead of just declaring "Ok. You combine those, keeping the lower AN to create Backstabbing: 3." I'd convert the actions back into Character Generation Stones, then allow him to buy the actions again at equal ANs, perhaps with some advantages if he wanted them. Then combine the actions into a new one. That probably isn't much different when combining these actions, but I suspect that with other combinations (like combining Illusions and Telekinesis to create "Tangible Illusions" or something) it could be more relevant.
Splitting actions... quickly becomes a mess. As a general rule, it should only be attempted by GMs who know what they're doing (or at least try to act like it). My personal Favorite action to break up is Manipulate Body Density. Some part of me greatly enjoys getting rid of the ability to decrease density, and focusing on the part that lets me get Strength or Toughness. I still haven't decided yet how much of a discount that should be worth.
Making new actions? Nah, I just don't have the energy for this right now.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 21, 2009 17:36:49 GMT -5
Well, this has a potential to quickly turn into a mess! But we've survived so far, which means anything is worth a shot. For combining actions, I'll start with an example. Say a character has Close Combat 3 and Thieving 5. He decides he wants to combine them into a new action (like a really watered-down version of Ninja). Instead of just declaring "Ok. You combine those, keeping the lower AN to create Backstabbing: 3." I'd convert the actions back into Character Generation Stones, then allow him to buy the actions again at equal ANs, perhaps with some advantages if he wanted them. Then combine the actions into a new one. That probably isn't much different when combining these actions, but I suspect that with other combinations (like combining Illusions and Telekinesis to create "Tangible Illusions" or something) it could be more relevant. That's how I always thought it should be done! It's more complicated but sometimes things MUST be complex to work right. Splitting actions... quickly becomes a mess. As a general rule, it should only be attempted by GMs who know what they're doing (or at least try to act like it). My personal Favorite action to break up is Manipulate Body Density. Some part of me greatly enjoys getting rid of the ability to decrease density, and focusing on the part that lets me get Strength or Toughness. I still haven't decided yet how much of a discount that should be worth. Making new actions? Nah, I just don't have the energy for this right now. Cwylric split up Energy Absorption and Reflection pretty well, and I actually used his pricing to create advantages on Force Fields and Energy Defense that reflected attacks or absorbed their energy. However you're right that it's very tricky to price. Thankfully in the case of Manipulate Body Density Phase Shift is sittting right there telling you how much the abilty to decrease density costs. I don't blame you for the lack of energy. I'm off to play some table-top Shadowrun or 3.5 Gestalt D&D
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 22, 2009 0:53:15 GMT -5
Hmmmmm.... Splitting and Combining Actions...
Firstly with combining actions... if someone does it logically, I don't see why it can't just happen for 10 LoE. But, something like Kaim said... instead of taking the lower action, take the average of all the actions...
EXAMPLE: Chrona wants to combine her Force Field, Force Blast and Mutant Healing into one action that would provide a protective healing field or beam that she can fire at range. Her Force Field action number is 6, her Force Blast is an 8, but her Mutant Healing is only a 4. The average of those numbers is 6, so her new action "Healing Light" comes in at AN 6...
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 22, 2009 19:36:46 GMT -5
I'm really wishing I had a better calculator.
Dionon, your system with your example ends up costing the same amount of stones as Kaimont's would have. What I don't know is whether that result will be consistent, or whether Kaimont's end result would have looked like yours: Force Field 6 +3 cost levels 12 stones
Force Blast 8 9 stones
Mutant Healing 4 +2 cost levels 4 stones
Total Cost: 25 stones
Combined by averaging the Action Numbers you get:
Healing Light 6 (Force Field 6 = 12 stones) (Force Blast 6 = 4 stones) (Mutant Healing 6 = 9 stones) What cost level increase for the new action? (It's relevant in case they increase it with stones instead of lines)
at...
25 stones worth of action
Got my money's worth
It would appear to be a +6 to cost level action.
So we might be curious "Why is this +6 to cost level?"
+3 for Force Field +2 for Mutant Healing =5
+1 for a third action at Cost level +0?
If you're curious why I keep going back and forth through the process, it's because I'm hoping to also create a system for making actions. What I ended up with just now was extra pieces after I built the bicycle...
Ugh, I'm getting to the part where I remember why I procrastinated making this thread for so long.
So...
Flight, Teleportation, and Phase Shift
All are +2 to cost level actions.
Three random numbers: 3, 5, 7
Flight 3 +2 CLs 3 stones
Teleportation 5 +2 CLs 6 stones
Phase Shift 7 +2 CLs 12 stones
21 stones
Average them together:
Ghostform 5 (Flight 5 = 6 stones) (Teleportation 5 = 6 stones) (Phase Shift 5 = 6 stones) +6 CL action
18 stones
Well that turned out to be a crappy deal. Of course it was probably going to when it had Phase Shift at a high AN.
I'll try the same thing breaking things down into character creation stones and then building from there: 21 stones to work with... that lets me buy them all at 5 again because any more and I break my budget. So I have 3 stones left over... I'll put "collateral damage" on the phase shift option and grab phase stun, making the phase shift aspect a +3 CL action instead of +2.
So I get:
Action I cannot name 5 Flight Phase Shift (Collateral damage, Phase Stun) Teleportation
*shrug* I'll fiddle with it.
Atm, here's what I'm getting. Dionon's system isn't bad for ease of use, but you can't get more cost-efficient then ripping something apart into its stone cost and putting it together again with the same amount.
To be honest that wasn't that hard either time. They're both pretty easy to use. There's a problem with advantages and disadvantages where you need to know when they're applied (Before or after combining), to what aspects of the action they're applied, and how much they're worth if they're applied afterward.
I'm bored of myself.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 22, 2009 21:36:44 GMT -5
Honestly, we're looking for ease of use for the lowest common denominator... IE which system can a 5 year old use better and faster?
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 22, 2009 22:27:07 GMT -5
Neither since a 5 year-old will just be getting into kindergarten and will be bad at adding and subtracting more than single-digit amounts of stones and will have a terrible time with averages because they use multiplication and division.
They'll just hand it to their dad and ask him to do it. That's how RPing with your kids works at that age anyway.
What kind of education did YOU get?!?
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 22, 2009 22:33:35 GMT -5
I was doing short division in Kindergarten....
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 22, 2009 23:06:30 GMT -5
Well that's just one more way in which you're special In terms of complexity the systems are similar. Yours is faster, but only by one simple math problem.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 22, 2009 23:11:23 GMT -5
lol, I guess... I always thought that was part of Kindergarten curriculum....
I dunno though... It should be a simple matter of 10 lines and a discussion with your GM to combine actions at the Average number... It's simple, easy, and it leaves creative control with the player and GM, and out of the designers hands.
But, as it's just a suggestion, I'll go with what the majority would like. This isn't one of those subjects I'm going to stick to my guns till someone pukes over.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 23, 2009 0:16:44 GMT -5
As much as I encourage people to have as much GM/player cooperative creation in MURPG, it's not always practical.
If you slap "Talk to your GM" onto everything then the player is helpless to prepare something by themselves. The GM also can't focus on creating a damn adventure if they're holding the player's hand all the time.
It's especially useless in play-by-post because your GM isn't getting on again until tomorrow and he might not have time to formulate a good answer to your PM.
Systems are created for GMs and players, but the people who NEED it are players. The GM has will-of-god power over everything, so they can move within the bounds of the system a lot or not at all. A player MUST stick to the system their GM grants them because they don't have "GM discretion" UNLESS their GM is right their babysitting them.
I think I'm gonna scour my books again.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Feb 23, 2009 0:38:03 GMT -5
True, but in this case, you should be discussing this with your GM long before you combine actions... This is one of those cases where your argument is moot. I can see it most of the time, but if you're combining powers together, your GM should already be involved.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Feb 23, 2009 11:29:36 GMT -5
If you have a template or guideline that keeps the combined actions within a certain power range then the GM does NOT need to be involved until it's time to approve the character.
If the argument were moot then I wouldn't have put up the thread. You want to split up Masteries? What if a player wants to put theirs back together? I expect they will because so far splitting them up is a terriblie deal.
Min-maxing in a point-buy system isn't powergaming, it's knowing what you're doing. Splitting actions, combining actions, and making new ones is extremely useful for making unique character concepts affordable. It should be available to players who want to design custom actions.
As for GM approval, I've met some GMs who if they were handed the reigns every single PC would be absolutely screwed for a decent CAD.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Feb 23, 2009 11:32:11 GMT -5
Uh... no. Min/Maxing in a point buy system is power gaming. Sorry.
|
|