|
Post by feloniousmonk on Mar 14, 2009 17:40:10 GMT -5
ok. Let me try to give an example as to why I have issues with free stones to defense and perhaps that will help you understand my great reservations concerning allowing people to have two, stackable free bonuses to defense which reduce damage.
Imagine a few heros. A and B as it works in 1.0
A has reflexive dodge 6 B has reflexive dodge 3 and toughness 3 C has toughness 6 D has neither, but has a veru powerful attack which the other dont have.
In general, these are going to be pretty equal in terms of of single enemies. A B and C will be able to survive long enough to simply keep pummeling him, D will be able to blast him easily in a single panel.
Change that single guy to 10 weaker guys. D will no longer be able to simply end the fight quickly. In fact, he will likely die, where the other 3 probably wont be phased much at all. Business as usual letting their free stones handle defense and their energy reserves handle attacking.
Now, I recognize that the system NEEDS this to some extent. Fine. But in the game I am running right now. I am a speed 10 character with 3 reflexive and 3 toughness. My party is an inventor, a kinetic absorber and a weak telepath/matter manipulator. I can beat the crap out of all of them because they have no defenses at all and I have 6 stones a turn to simply ignore on their attacks.
Which brings me to my idea of reflexive being all or nothing and toughness being expensive, or limited to get.
That same 1 tough opponent, A and B are going to have more trouble with because they will need to spend stones on defense as well as attack. Where C and D generally keep business as usual.
10 weaker but opponents A is probably doing pretty well unless the 10 guys manage to get him cornered somehow. B is fairing a lot better than D but still has to make decisions on attacking and defending. C is still trucking along, soaking damage and beating people up.
Of the four examples, each has its own strengths and weaknesses, but hero C has far fewer weaknesses than the other. My idea goes a long way to limiting that, while giving hero the other heroes a lot more options when considering how to defend. Spending a few stones in creation to allow them to defend more efficiently with energy stones begins looking a lot more attractive.
Additionally, when you think about it, most heroes in Marvel have their abilities that they have learned to use in defensive ways. Actively using their powers to defend instead of attack. Having a system that depends more heavily on active defenses is more in line with the comics. Allowing for the super fast and super tough characters to build in such a way that their character ideas are feasible is good, but it should require sacrifice for power that strong.
Honestly, I think toughness is one of the most powerful abilities in the game because the breadth of its usefulness. Almost every combat will benefit from it. Especially if you have no armor piercing attached to it.
Am I missing something? does this not make sense as to why I think free stones to defense are a very tricky widget? Do you understand why I think free stone are a bad idea in general but I compromising to allow for characters we see in comic books and some character ideas which make sense and are logical to be able to build?
As to your point over increasing stats, it is relatively simple to adjust the standard starting amount of stones for character creation. You can even standardize a starting health or energy that people can improve of lower if they wish.
As to a partial dodging reducing the damage of a hit. Yes, realism is great. But let us not forget the fundamental rule of the game. If you have enough stones of effort in to an action, you succeed, if you don't you fail.
An idea of compromise would be allow a person to purchase damage nullification at a rate of 1 white per up to a maximum of (spd+agi)/2 so it would be expensive, but you could get the 'roll with the punches' mechanic with training. So if a person had evasion 5 from 5 in spd and agi then spent 3 stones for 'roll with the punches' he could ignore 3 damage from any hit that exceeded his 5 evasion. Perhaps more expensive, but not cheaper I dont think.. I dunno.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Mar 15, 2009 0:27:31 GMT -5
Ok... let me make this clear... You're not attempting to compromise... You're stating your same opinion again in a different way so that people think you've given in a little.
What I'm saying is that no... alot of comic book defense (Unless forcefields and barriers are used) aren't actually active. You don't see the Thing getting shanked by a local street tough because he wasn't paying attention.. You don't see Spiderman getting shot because he was looking the other way.
While yes, free stones shouldn't be all willy nilly, I see no reason that something like Reflexive Dodge has to be all or nothing... Hell, on that note, you better make Toughness all or nothing too... Cause you know... if you beat their toughness.. you've broken their skin... wow... not so tough now are you?
It doesn't work like that, especially in comics. Even if he's in a tiny little room, Spiderman's still going to bound from wall to wall to escape stuff. Even if he's asleep, the Thing is pretty much bullet proof.
What you're suggesting would honestly be the suicide of many heroes that we've seen take anything from Nuclear explosions to hails of gunfire and come out smiling.
Personally... I've never really bent on my view on Defense. The Defense Matrix and the ability to push it beyond a little is perfectly acceptable to me. Given that to increase the Defense it has an applicable cost that would make it prohibitive and concept specific. Hence my suggestion of (Current Defense Number + Addition) + 3 CL as a price. (IE If the Hulk has 6, and wants to bring it to an 8 for Toughness, he has to pay 6 + 2 + 3 CL or 11 CL or 20 stones. I think that's MORE than fair.)
|
|
|
Post by feloniousmonk on Mar 15, 2009 1:45:24 GMT -5
Ok, I agree. that is more than fair. But at that point you would just go invulnerability
My argument remains, that for the sake of the game, more active defenses should be desired.
Take colossus as an example. He isn't tough all the time, only when he is metallic. That is an active ability. Thing and Hulk seem to be fairly specific examples. The majority seem to have some sort of active defense. Spidey still has to put effort in to avoiding blows given the knowledge of his spidey sense. Under my system, most of those come from evasion based on statistics, but he could improve that with concentrated effort.
my main argument remains that free stones to defense aren't a good thing, but they are neccesary at some level. My goal is to find what level is best gor the game and not necessarily for the purposes of matching the comics. Compromises from the comics to the game MUST be made. There is no getting around that. Otherwise you would have comic characters unbeatable in the game, or game characters unbeatable in the comics.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Mar 15, 2009 1:50:45 GMT -5
1. More than likely we're going to be working Invulnerability differently anyway... Don't know if it's cheaper or not...
2. If you see my way as fair, can we just call this done.
In Comic Book universes, you've actually got your facts reversed. Colossus is the Wierd one, while the Hulk and Thing are the ones that show up more often. I can name on my left hand the number of "Transform into something more powerful" characters... If we were to do the same thing with "We're just plain Tough/Fast" characters, we'd need an army...
Free Stones of Defense is saddly the norm in comic books, not the other way around. Yes people put in stones for active defense, but that's because free stones are limited, and always have been. You don't need a crap load of new actions that say "Hey.. I defended myself."
In the end, let's just call it even, you've recognized my way as the fair route, I recognize it as the fair route, there's not much more to go with.
|
|
|
Post by feloniousmonk on Mar 15, 2009 2:05:13 GMT -5
ok.. so can you give a write up for what you think defense should look like in as a total picture?
If you want, a couple of examples of what you think would be the most common 'power gamer' and a few 'real character idea' builds would go a long way to understanding what you see as best.
God I love game design. God I am drunk. God I love beer.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Mar 15, 2009 2:09:11 GMT -5
I think Dionon's pricing is a little too viscious.
In all my charting that follows there exists a generic modifier called "Defense" that is +3 to cost level... we all know what it does:
I'll use Black Cat (I like how her simple peak human-ness gets her 6 defense, so I feel like using it more). She starts with 6 Defense (3 Reflexive Dodge, 3 Toughness, ALL of it is just "Defense").
With my system she would have to pay 8 stones to get 2 more Reflexive Dodge (Because she subtracted what her current defense would cost from the total)
With Dionon's system she would have to pay 20 stones to get 2 more Reflexive Dodge
Next is Hulk. He starts with 10 Defense (8 Toughness, 2 Reflexive Dodge). He wants it to go to 12 because he wants 10 Toughness.
I charge him 10 stones
Dionon charges him 40
...
While including what their "free" defense WOULD cost in the total cost certainly discourages abuse, it also keeps the Hulk out of reach of most PCs for a playable character. 10 stones is horrible enough.
However, because my original concept is so complicated, I again want to suggest we adapt the matrix once again (We did it first when we eliminated the will stat). I suggested this earlier, this is just re-posted with a better idea for the Defense modifier.
Average ALL physical ability scores (round final result down, so they can't get 10 free defense unless they have four 10's). That is the player's "Defense" and they choose whether it's reflexive Dodge or Toughness. This allows people like Juggernaut - who doesn't WANT to dodge - to have a lot of Toughness.
The "Defense" modifier in this system is priced thusly: Cost = Modifier Number + Current Defense MN
So it advances like someone who is upgrading their Healing Factor, and is only priced for advancement (Rather than initial purchase, since no one can ever have less than 1 and everyone always has at least 1.). After all, why are we pricing it like another modifier when it IS NOT anything like another modifier? You never buy it, you just improve your existing version of it.
So Hulk has a free Defense Modifier of 5, but if he wants it to go up to 8, he pays 9 stones. He bought 3 points of Defense at +5 to cost level, which is cost level 8 (9 stones). He decides it's all Toughness.
If that seems too cheap you're forgetting that he has yet to enhance his defense with immunity to armor penetration or multiplication nullification.
I think I like this one best.
In my next post I'm going to try to break this (Or prove it unbreakable, we'll find out. T'will be as new t'you as 'tis to me)
|
|
|
Post by feloniousmonk on Mar 15, 2009 2:22:29 GMT -5
I really like that idea. so Defense would be vulnerable to lots of attacks like armor penetration, mutiplication, and area of effect? All of which can be solved by spending stones to negate?
Sounds reasonable to me.
|
|
|
Post by malice on Mar 15, 2009 2:29:11 GMT -5
I posted some stuff but the math was horrible and proved to me I need to get to bed. So I deleted it all except what follows: I've failed to break it but I never feel like I've proven something is unbreakable. The nice thing is that until someone breaks it I can say no one has yet. Anecdote: My old priest used to make fun of doomsayers thusly: "People ask me if I think the world is going to end soo n. I tell them 'It's closer now than it has ever been', because it hasn't happened yet. I really like that idea. so Defense would be vulnerable to lots of attacks like armor penetration, mutiplication, and area of effect? All of which can be solved by spending stones to negate? Sounds reasonable to me. Yes sir, just like in MURPG 1. I like paper/rock/scissors types of systems, they almsot always seem to work well in practice even if they don't always make sense.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Mar 15, 2009 2:39:22 GMT -5
Wait!!! No!! I charge (Defensive Ability + Difference) +3 CL
Not total defense + difference, the individual one....
|
|
|
Post by malice on Mar 15, 2009 11:47:40 GMT -5
Wait!!! No!! I charge (Defensive Ability + Difference) +3 CL Not total defense + difference, the individual one.... My comprehension skills have been horrible lately for reasons I can't fathom, so please forgive me. What do you mean "Defensive Ability"?
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Mar 15, 2009 16:16:34 GMT -5
If you want to raise Toughness... You take your Current Toughness... Add the difference between the Old and New (IE 6 + 2 = 8) then add 3 (11) and THAT'S the cost level to raise it... It's literally just like buying the old Toughness.
Do Reflexive Dodge the same way...
|
|
|
Post by malice on Mar 18, 2009 1:42:07 GMT -5
If you want to raise Toughness... You take your Current Toughness... Add the difference between the Old and New (IE 6 + 2 = 8) then add 3 (11) and THAT'S the cost level to raise it... It's literally just like buying the old Toughness. Do Reflexive Dodge the same way... That's STILL super-viscious and encourages stacking. If people can pay LESS for Reflexive Dodge AND Toughness then they will for just tons of Toughness or tons of Reflexive Dodge, why wouldn't they? I have a problem with the concept where you give someone something for free, but then charge them for it when they want to improve it. I really think making total defense into one modifier is the best way to go. So Cap's CAD, as it is in the book, would instead look like this: Defense +4 Components: 3 Reflexive Dodge 1 Toughness Using the Defense Matrix, it would be like this: Defense +7 Components: 4 Toughness 3 Reflexive Dodge (He doesn't buy any additional defense because with his shield he actually has a damn good defense) Averaging all his physical ability scores would make it look like this: Defense +3 Components: Toughness 1 Reflexive Dodge 2 He then buys 1 more Reflexive Dodge at +3 to cost level (3 being his current Defense MN). Every single method we've discussed still makes really high free defenses at least as expensive as before, which I think means we're on the right track. I'd like to have a yay or nay on this concept though: Instead of Toughness and Reflexive Dodge being seperate modifiers, there is a single modifier, within which is contained Toughness and Reflexive Dodge (MURPG's version of Flat-footed and Touch AC/Reflex Saves). I know it's been assumed, but I want people's official opinions. Next I'd like a yay or nay on BOTH these statements: IF we use the Defense Matrix or an evolution of it, the Defense Modifier's pricing (Because it can be added even after you've received your free defense from the matrix) is based on your current free Defense and is not a flat rate (Just as Healing Factors, Energy Battery, and Deep Reserves now are priced based on your durability). IF we do not use the Defense Matrix and players have to buy free defense like before, the price adjustment is flat just like anything else with a cost level (Toughness and Reflexive Dodge are currently +3 to cost level no matter what level you buy). This "yay or nay" business is just my preliminary effort to make sure we're on the same page or to get us on the same page. If we all think we've thought of a great defense system, my next move would be to make a poll that presents the system.
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Mar 18, 2009 2:13:01 GMT -5
Hold on... You're saying I'm vicious, but I'm at least being fair to all parties. You're just handing out stones like they're free candy. Seriously, if you go "Ok.. buy Defense at +3 CL, then split that into Toughness and Reflexive Dodge" You're essentially giving out several stones of defense for free..
Using the Defense Matrix for a Base, and then determining how to improve them BASED on that base is not vicious, or unkind, or unfair. It's just good writing, and being fair to GM and Player alike.
It's EXACTLY like Energy Battery, Deep Reserves and the like, because it takes into account each defense method. You want more toughness, well ok, you have toughness 3, to improve it is Current+3 CL... Why is that bad?
Give me a better reason why you disagree than "I don't like it" Show me how it's unfair.
|
|
|
Post by Neros on Mar 18, 2009 2:23:53 GMT -5
I would give a big "Yay" on the "One Defense Modifier" thing (If i understand it correctly).. I've been thinking about something similar (if not exactly the same), and it sounds much simpler than the matrix and would prevent the old "3 Toughness, 3 Reflexive Dodge" problem.. But it works just like having Toughness and Reflexive Dodge as before, except its better priced if you want both?
And how is he giving Defense Stones out for free? I can't see how it is giving more free stones than the original system..
The reason I don't like it, is it seems more complex than it needs to be..
|
|
|
Post by Dionon on Mar 18, 2009 2:40:38 GMT -5
Can I ask what is complex about the Matrix? Seriously... Average out 2 stats... If you want to improve them, it's +3 CL, but remember to take your old defensive mod into account first...
I just put it all into 2 sentences. What's complex... It's really more simple than just about anything I've heard, and the "One Defensive Modifier" thing is just as complex, except where one did Averages, this one does Division...
Seriously... there's no real difference except one takes your natural physicality into consideration, and the other just sits there like the 800lbs gorilla in the room. And don't let anyone price it above +3.. Personally if we're doing a static Defense, I'd like to see it at +4, but I'm going to be yelled down on this too... Cause, who cares about fairness... we just want a system we can exploit once it's done.
|
|