Hero points

[Haltherrion]

Hi, all,

I'd like to continue the hero point discussion.

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.

Marc

 

[SuperBeast]

First off, nice job on the forum, marcq!

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.

 

[SuperBeast]

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.

 

[Haltherrion]

First off, nice job on the forum, marcq!

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?

Marc

 

[Haltherrion]

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:

1. 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.
2. 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?

Marc

 

[SuperBeast]

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?

 

[Haltherrion]

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

 

[Haltherrion]

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?

 

[SuperBeast]

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.

 

[sivousplay]

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

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.