Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 9169159" data-attributes="member: 7026617">You didn't have to want them all exactly in proportion.  Just enough.  I used the example I gave because almost every super was going to want at least that much of each of them more.  The only way they otherwise weren't going to just buy them straight was if someone was going to decide to invest in a massive Constitution (where you'd also get a lot of Stun and Recovery at least)--but there was a lot more diminishing returns there after a certain point.  And honestly "every character wanted a massive Con too" wouldn't have been a better design trait.I mean, its wasn't like that you couldn't toss that Strength on, and then buy up the extras you wanted above that from there.  How many characters didn't want at least a +5 Stun, +2 Rec, and +2 PD over base or what other base attributes gave you?  I'm not sure I ever saw so much as a one.But again, how many Hero characters only wanted one of them?  No extra stun, PD or REC?  It wasn't like that was a huge amount for either of those.  Even if you assumed someone already had a 20 Con (giving them another 2 REC and 5 STun) a 30 stun and 8 REC was hardly anything high end for a PC in almost any genre you were going to be using Hero for.  You wanted it on characters you didn't even want Strength on--but it was literally cheaper to just take the Strength even if you never planned to use it.That was fundamentally the problem with most of the figured stats; at some point they tended to trump concept because of cost effectiveness.  If you wanted a 7 OCV and DCV that was universally or at least broadly useable, you didn't have to get it by buying a 20 DEX--but the only other way to do it involved buying some number of 8 point combat levels on the OCV and 5 levels on the DCV, and even one of each of those was more expensive than 9 character points it took to buy 3 more points of Dex.  And it would, over accumulation, buy you initiative and some amount of extra Speed to boot.I was really, really soggy about the removal of figured characteristics when it came up.  On some level the complete disconnect bothered me.  But at least with the old numbers it just really didn't work right.But again, it meant there was a perverse incentive to to buy up each regular attribute to where you'd get the amount of minimum yield out of it you needed, and then buy up an extra from there--even if the base attribute didn't seem to be something you should have that high.  Strength and Dex were the primary offenders here, and by its nature, Strength tended to be more glaring.Should they?  In every case in every genre?  Especially as strong as the system would have them be?  Again, it says something when practically ever character built for the games I saw would have benefited in cost by going to a 20 Strength.  I can't recall ever seeing one that didn't want at least that +5 Stun/+2 PD/+2 REC.  A fair number of people didn't do it by buying Strength, but that was a case of them resisting what the game system told them was the way to do it, and they shouldn't have had to.I think the argument was that forcing that assumption, was an even bigger one.The difference is, I think, how frequently they each come up.  Abuse-land while it can occur by accident, is usually a consequence of someone poking into dark corners by accident or deliberately.  The problems with figured  stats and ECs on the other hand, were visible all the time.  There were whole classes of characters who, if represented properly, were paying extra for simply not being able to take advantage of those.</blockquote>

Verification