Here's what I'm looking to accomplish with the system:
I'm looking for a hero points that has some impact so I've gone with larger magnitudes than other systems.
I'm concerned about players hording hero points so I put in a cap. (That is, I'd rather have players use them as they go along rather than save them for some finale encounter.)
The HP award is not subjective. No player or ref awards. (My experience with player or ref XP awards is that they tend to encourage player showboating & game-time hogging).
Amount of points per level is a function of the character creation process. Some players could trade better stats, gold, and other stuff for more hero points per level. In an extreme case, that could be 3x other PCs but in such a case, that PC would be much lower on stats, gear, etc.
They don't effect NPC rolls.
They can emulate metamagic effects.
They can effect damage rolls. (One possibility is to use one to make your threatened critical (when you get one) and another to max the damage roll. Could be lots of damage.)
An NPC can only have hero points used against him once per round. (I have visions of the party ganging up on my poor 'boss' NPC.)
I'm concerned that the bonuses may be too large but I also want the hero points to matter.
JJ raised some concerns about the laurel wreath suit benefits relative to the hammer & sword cards but I'll let him recap that.
Right now, I like the Hero Points the way that they are, except I think that the bonus to spell/power DC's should be +4/+6/+8. It is basically a boost for the lesser point expendatures. I figure since a warrior gets a +10 on attack, that a +2 on DC is not enough for it to be even.
The only thing that I noticed about the sword and hammer cards is that there are a few repeats. Maybe it would be nice to get a card that allows you to have a bonus feat that you do not have to meet the pre-requistes for? Otherwise, the amount of starting GP you get for your S&H cards takes care of the "lesser" bounuses you get from the individual cards.
Right now, I like the Hero Points the way that they are, except I think that the bonus to spell/power DC's should be +4/+6/+8. It is basically a boost for the lesser point expendatures. I figure since a warrior gets a +10 on attack, that a +2 on DC is not enough for it to be even.
Yeah, but there is a big difference between causing damage from an attack and gauranteeing a 'hold' or other incapacitating effect. I'm nervous about the DC effects. How about +2/+4/+6?
The only thing that I noticed about the sword and hammer cards is that there are a few repeats. Maybe it would be nice to get a card that allows you to have a bonus feat that you do not have to meet the pre-requistes for? Otherwise, the amount of starting GP you get for your S&H cards takes care of the "lesser" bounuses you get from the individual cards.
I'll confess I was running out of steam by the time I got to that suit. I had originally intended that various cards would give you bonuses in various categories of feats, for instance a string of combat feats, or the equivalent of a weapon style or some metamagics. But I steared away from that for two reasons:
The card size didn't leave a lot of room for text to list these feat groups. However, after talking with JJ, I think we are going to do large format cards for the figures (because it would be cooler ) and we might as well make the suit cards large too. BTW I'll try to have a card mock-up tonight on the Ophir website.
I thought that making cards be more restrictive on feats or skills would make the suit even less attractive than it already is.
I could make the cards less repetitive by making them more specific but you could very well end up with a feat card that gives magic feats for your fighter. Of course, you still get the money.
I need to thnk abuot that suit. Maybe it should be completely revamped. Any suggestions?
Yeah, but there is a big difference between causing damage from an attack and gauranteeing a 'hold' or other incapacitating effect. I'm nervous about the DC effects. How about +2/+4/+6?
Marc
Well, here is the thing, if we do a +2/+4/+6 then it is only helpful when you are casting against an opponents worst save. If it is against thier best save, then only the +6 will really help you. Think about Olin for a second, I did everything I could to boost his DC's (the tele powers are all at +10 or something crazy!) and still if I target someone who has a good fortitude save, they will ususally make it. So, what if we have different DC bonuses for different spell types? If the spell is a save or die type spell, then it is +2/+4/+6, but if it is any other type of spell it is +4/+6/+8. What are your thoughts on that?
Well, here is the thing, if we do a +2/+4/+6 then it is only helpful when you are casting against an opponents worst save. If it is against thier best save, then only the +6 will really help you. Think about Olin for a second, I did everything I could to boost his DC's (the tele powers are all at +10 or something crazy!) and still if I target someone who has a good fortitude save, they will ususally make it. So, what if we have different DC bonuses for different spell types? If the spell is a save or die type spell, then it is +2/+4/+6, but if it is any other type of spell it is +4/+6/+8. What are your thoughts on that?
My recollection of Olin as a ref is that the bad guys rarely made their save. We can try 4/6/8 and see how it works.
Marc
__________________ Marc
___
Certain death, small chance of success. What are we waiting for?
I'm concerned about the hero points being used to quickly guarantee a victory for the players so I was considering a rule to limit their frequency of their use. Too severe a rule will penalize players that opted for lots of laurel cards but some limit seems appropriate.
What do you think about something like the following:
If a character uses HP on an attack on round, any HP expenditure for any other attacks that round or in the following round are doubled.
I'm also considering this formulation:
After any PC uses HPs for an attack, any use of HPs for an attack in the same round has double HP cost.
Thoughts?
__________________ Marc
___
Certain death, small chance of success. What are we waiting for?
I'm concerned about the hero points being used to quickly guarantee a victory for the players so I was considering a rule to limit their frequency of their use. Too severe a rule will penalize players that opted for lots of laurel cards but some limit seems appropriate.
What do you think about something like the following:
If a character uses HP on an attack on round, any HP expenditure for any other attacks that round or in the following round are doubled.
I'm also considering this formulation:
After any PC uses HPs for an attack, any use of HPs for an attack in the same round has double HP cost.
Thoughts?
Well, it is not a bad idea. Does this mean they could spend HP's on saving thier skin without penalty (like on saves or skill checks)? I think the cost of those should never change. Otherwise I think it sounds good. Personally I don't mind a limit of only being able to spend HP's on one attack per round. But the way you propose gives more options to the player, but with a penalty.
Having generally played an heroic character, it seems the best way to "accomplish" heroism with the system would actually be to limit the number of times you can use hero points, but allow you to use a whopping big dose of them when you felt like using them. It does mean that a character that is "highly heroic" may occassionally cause the ref some real grief by removing an otherwise diffcult foe with ease (I reference the killing-blow Mannix issued to Dispater ... one mighty blow was the perfect end to his very heroic act ... a lot of slightly better blows would not have been considered (or have been) nearly as heroic).
jim
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperBeast
Well, it is not a bad idea. Does this mean they could spend HP's on saving thier skin without penalty (like on saves or skill checks)? I think the cost of those should never change. Otherwise I think it sounds good. Personally I don't mind a limit of only being able to spend HP's on one attack per round. But the way you propose gives more options to the player, but with a penalty.
I'm concerned that without some limits, the HP use can get bogus. And I think it is important to try our best to tune this before play as much as possible to minimize the chance that a player gets penalized for favoring HP in the draft because if HP doesn't work out, it will be dropped.
There are various limits I was considering but none apply to 'defensive' use of HP (like saving throws and nearly all skill use; some skill use is offensive, like combat feints but probably not worth counting those as attacks):
Already there is the limit of one NPC can only have HP used against him once per round.
We could add the additional cost that it gets more expensive for a PC to use HPs for attacks in the round following one where that same PC used HPs for an attack (I kind of like this myself)
We could add the additional cost that anyone using HPs for an attack in the same (or following?) round that any PC used HPs for an attack pays double
I like #1 and think we should keep it. I kind of like #2 but I'm not too keen on #3 since PCs start interfering too much with each other's actions.
Also, I do want to keep the ability to expend boat-loads of HP and load up your to-hit, your critical and your damage die. I think that would be a good use and honestly, most players will save a few HP for the saves they really need to make and the rest for the 'killer strike' I would guess except in the case where someone has a large amount of HPs due to the cards.
BTW don't let me forget but I need to add the ability to use HP to improve your initiative. Sometimes, it really matters
__________________ Marc
___
Certain death, small chance of success. What are we waiting for?
So, I probably missed this somewhere, but wanted to make sure I understood something about the usage of HP ... can I 1). spend HP to increase my attack, 2). spend HP to increase my threatened critical role (should I get one), 3). spend HP to maximize damage from the critical? It seems like you can, but I wanted to make sure.
jim
__________________ "Get her? ... That was your plan? ... Get her?"
So, I probably missed this somewhere, but wanted to make sure I understood something about the usage of HP ... can I 1). spend HP to increase my attack, 2). spend HP to increase my threatened critical role (should I get one), 3). spend HP to maximize damage from the critical? It seems like you can, but I wanted to make sure.
jim
Yep. You can only use them on one attack but for that attack, you can use them anyway you want. to-hit, threatened crit, damage, etc. Or for a spell, DC+spell penetration+metamagics.
It is designed so that you can use it to make a single killer attack rather than modify multiple lesser attacks.
__________________ Marc
___
Certain death, small chance of success. What are we waiting for?
If you can use HP's in back to back rounds to do big hits, that is a lot of damage! So the penalty to do so is warrented.
I also agree, that we should make sure that the rules do not take into account what other PC's have done. Like you say, your heroics should not be hinged on the heroics of your companions.
hey,
I saw that you lived in corvallis. I just moved here to go to OSU. Looking for a group. Any system, any setting, and experience level (I'd call myself an intermediate level player). email me at : frotch25@yahoo.com if your looking for some more players, or know someone that is.
) and we might as well make the suit cards large too. BTW I'll try to have a card mock-up tonight on the Ophir website.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
